Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2008  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/americanembargoOOjenn 


PIEST  SERIES,  NO.  55  DECEMBER  1,  1921 


UNIVERSITY  OF  IOWA  STUDIES 


STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

VOUJME  VIII  NUMBER  1 

THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO 
1807-1809 

BY 

Walter  Wilson  Jennings 


PUBLISHED  BY  THE  UNIVERSITY,  IOWA  CITY 

Issued  semi-monthly  throughont  the  year.     Entered  at  the  post  ofiSce  at  Iowa  City,  Iowa  as 

second  class  matter.    Acceptance  for  mailing  at  special  rate  of  postage  provided  for 

in  Section  1103,  Act  of  October  8,  1917,  authorized  on  Jnly  8,  1918 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

SANTA  BARBARA 

COLLEGE  OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

presented  by 

Homer   C.   Hockett 


'  '""*  ^H^*^ 


UNIVERSITY  OF  IOWA  STUDIES 
IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 


A.  M.  ScHLESiNGER,  Editor 
C.  M.  Case,  Advisory  Editor     J.  Van  der  Zee,  Advisory  Editor 


VOLUME  VIII  NUMBER  1 

THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO 
1807-1809 

WITH  PARTICULAR  REFERENCE  TO  ITS  EFFECT 
ON  INDUSTRY 


BY 


WALTER  WILSON  JENNINGS,  Ph.  D. 

Assistant   Professor  of  Coniinerce 


PUBLISHED  BY  THE  UNIVERSITY,  IOWA  CITY 


Ji 


iv-...i...^  v.ui.Li.L;:]  LIBRAEY 


CONTENTS 

chapter  page 

Editor's  Introduction 5^  6 

Author's  Preface       ----.---.-..  7^  g 

I.    American  Commerce,  1798-1807 9-22 

II.     Foreign   Restrictions   on    Commerce    -    -    -  23-37 

III.  The  Embargo  in  Legislation,  Congressional 

Debate,  and  Diplomacy 38-69 

IV.  Economic  Effects  of  Embargo  on  Warring 

Nations    with    Particular    Reference    to 
England  and  Her  Colonies    -----      70-93 

V.    Attitude  of  the  United  States  Towards  the 

Embargo  - 94-129 

VI.     Growing  Opposition  to  the  Embargo  Finally 

Forces    Repeal      ---------       130-165 

VII.  Effect  of  the  Embargo  on  Manufactures  -  166-181 
VIII.     Effect  of  the  Embargo  on  Agriculture    -    -  182-203 

IX.     Effect  of  the  Embargo  on  Commerce    -    -    -  204-231 

Bibliography 232-237 

Index    -    -    -    - 238-242 


EDITOR'S  INTRODUCTION 

The  instinct  of  the  American  people  has  always  been  averse 
to  war.  Whenever  a  serious  national  crisis  provocative  of 
war  has  threatened  and  diplomatic  methods  have  failed,  the 
tendency  of  the  American  people  has  been  to  resort  to  meas- 
ures of  commercial  coercion  rather  than  to  armed  force.  The 
philosophy  underlying  such  action  is  clear  enough:  since  the 
most  fruitful  cause  of  oppressive  conduct  among  nations  is 
the  desire  for  economic  advantage  in  some  form  or  other, 
the  remedy  of  a  peaceful  people  is  to  be  found  in  the  appli- 
cation of  an  economic  counter-irritant  more  powerful  than 
the  original  exciting  cause.  If  there  be  a  fallacy  in  this  posi- 
tion, it  is  dual  in  character.  In  the  first  place,  the  economic 
weapon  is  always  two-edged  and,  in  a  world  closely  knit  to- 
gether by  commercial  and  financial  ties,  may  inflict  more 
injury  upon  the  people  wielding  it  than  upon  the  power 
against  which  it  is  directed.  Secondly,  it  is  based  upon  too 
na'ive  an  assumption.  Granting  that  the  roots  of  oppression 
are  generally  economic  in  character,  any  effort  to  combat 
that  oppression  by  economic  means  is  likely  to  arouse  nation- 
alistic feelings  and  instincts  that  entirely  transform  the  na- 
ture of  the  dispute.  Thus  economic  coercion  loses  its  efficacy 
as  a  pacific  weapon  and  leads  inevitably  to  the  appeal  to 
arms  that  it  was  designed  to  prevent. 

Americans  first  used  economic  coercion  on  a  widespread 
scale  in  the  ten  years'  controversy  preceding  the  outbreak  of 
the  War  for  Independence.  The  non-importation  and  non- 
consumption  regulations  of  the  colonists  during  the  Grenville 
and  Townshend  acts  proved  successful  in  bringing  about 
modifications  of  British  policy;  but  the  more  comprehensive 
boycott  adopted  in  the  later  years  of  the  controversy  touched 
deeply  British  national  pride  and  helped  to  precipitate  the 
war.  In  the  seventeen-ninetics  Jefferson  and  his  group 
sought,  without  result,  to  persuade  the  majority  party  to 
revive  the  boycott  for  use  against  Great  Britain  prior  to  the 


6  IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

Jay  treaty.  When  Jefferson's  party  got  into  power  in  1801, 
it  was  inevitable  that  he  should  bethink  himself  of  non-inter- 
course as  the  surest  and  sanest  way  out  of  the  difficulties 
created  for  the  United  States  by  the  Napoleonic  wars.  Pro- 
fessor Jennings  in  the  present  monograph  confines  himself 
to  a  study  of  the  embargo,  the  first  and  most  drastic  form 
of  commercial  pressure  put  into  operation  by  the  Jefferson 
administration,  and  leaves  the  examination  of  Madison's 
coercive  measures  to  later  students. 

The  outbreak  of  the  second  war  with  Great  Britain  in  1812 
did  not  entirely  destroy  the  faith  of  the  American  people 
in  the  efficacy  of  economic  non-intercourse  as  a  substitute  for 
war.  As  the  Civil  War  approached,  no  measure  of  relief  was 
perhaps  more  favorably  discussed  by  southern  public  men 
than  the  adoption  of  non-intercourse  against  the  manufactur- 
ing North;  and  indeed  blacklists  of  so-called  ''abolition 
houses"  of  the  North  were  published  in  the  southern  press 
although  no  widespread  or  concerted  action  was  taken  against 
them.  Again,  as  the  World  War  threatened  to  draw  the 
United  States  into  its  vortex,  the  time-honored  method  of 
coercion  was  revived  in  the  public  prints  and  served  for  a 
time  to  confuse  and  complicate  the  discussions  during  that 
critical  period.  It  is  worthy  of  note  that  one  outcome  of 
that  great  conflict  has  been  to  give  to  this  oft-rejected  meas- 
ure international  sanction  by  providing,  in  the  Covenant  of 
the  League  of  Nations,  for  its  employment  against  recalci- 
trant members  of  the  League. 

In  the  present  study  Professor  Jennings  undertakes  to  set 
forth  the  history  of  the  embargo  of  Jefferson's  time  with  all 
its  surrounding  circumstances.  His  especial  contribution  is 
the  searching  examination  he  makes  into  the  economic  effects 
of  the  embargo  and  his  discussion  of  the  reaction  of  American 
public  opinion  to  its  operation, 

Arthur  M.  Schlesinger, 


AUTHOR'S  PREFACE 

The  material  for  this  monograph  which  was  first  suggested 
to  the  author  by  Professor  E.  L.  Bogart,  now  head  of  the 
Economics  Department  at  the  University  of  Illinois,  was  ob- 
tained largely  from  the  libraries  of  the  universities  of  Illinois, 
Wisconsin,  and  Iowa,  and  the  writer  is  greatly  indebted  to 
the  librarians  of  those  institutions  for  their  courteous  treat- 
ment and  help.  The  valuable  newspaper  collection  at  the 
University  of  Wisconsin  has  been  of  especial  service.  The  use 
of  this  material  was  made  possible  by  the  research  fund  which 
Carl  E.  Seashore,  Dean  of  the  Graduate  School  of  the  Univer- 
sity of  Iowa,  accords  to  students  and  teachers  who  are  actively 
engaged  in  research  work.  Miss  Jane  E.  Roberts,  librarian 
of  the  University  of  Iowa,  has  gone  to  considerable  trouble  in 
borrowing  certain  newspapers  from  the  Library  of  the  History 
Department  of  Iowa  at  Des  Moines, 

As  the  work  progressed  the  manuscript  grew  very  bulky; 
hence  it  became  necessary  to  summarize  three  of  the  original 
chapters,  containing  over  one  hundred  typed  pages,  into  ten 
or  twenty  pages  which  were  added  to  the  chapter  on  "The 
Embargo  Laws. ' '  These  three  chapters  were  originally  entitled 
''Diplomacy  of  the  Embargo,"  "Arguments  on  the  Embargo 
in  the  First  Session  of  Congress,  1807-1808,"  and  "Arguments 
on  the  Embargo  in  the  Second  Session  of  Congress  till  the 
Passage  of  the  Enforcement  Act,  1808-1809." 

Professor  C.  M.  Thompson,  Dean  of  the  College  of  Commerce, 
University  of  Illinois,  has  gone  carefully  over  the  work  of  his 
former  pupil  and  has  made  valuable  suggestions.  Professor 
P.  S.  Peirce,  formerly  of  the  Economics  Department  of  this 
institution,  has  also  read  and  criticized  the  manuscript  with 
care.  Professor  C.  M.  Case,  of  the  Sociologj^  Department, 
Professor  Jacob  Van  der  Zee,  of  the  Political  Science  Depart- 
ment, and  Professor  A.  M.  Schlesinger,  head  of  the  History 
Department,  have  read  the  manuscript  with  great  care  and 
have    offered    constructive    criticism.      The    writer    wishes    to 


8  IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

acknowledge,  a  special  debt  to  Professor  Schlesinger  for  his 
valuable  suggestions.  The  merits  of  the  work,  if  it  has  any, 
are  largely  due  to  those  who  have  written  and  advised;  its 
defects  are  due  to  the  author  alone. 

Walter  AV.  Jennings. 

Iowa  City,  Iowa,  May  20,  1921. 


CHAPTER  I 
INTRODUCTION 

During  the  troubled  days  following  the  Revolutionary  War 
and  the  winning  of  independence,  American  industry  remained 
in  an  unsettled  condition.  Few  powers  cared  to  make  treaties 
with  a  country  which  was  a  single  nation  one  day  and  thirteen 
nations  on  the  next.  After  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution, 
however,  conditions  grew  more  stable,  industry  improved,  and 
the  ncAv  republic  began  to  command  respect  abroad. 

In  1793,  another  phase  of  the  life  and  death  struggle  between 
England  and  France  began,  and  continued,  with  some  inter- 
missions, until  Napoleon's  overthrow  in  1815.  During  this 
period  the  commerce  of  the  United  States  increased  by  leaps 
and  bounds.  Inasmuch  as  England's  naval  superiority  soon 
gave  her  control  of  the  sea,  France  and  other  powers  at  odds 
with  England  had  to  depend  on  neutrals  to  handle  their  trade. 
The  various  products  of  the  French,  Spanish  and  Dutch  East 
and  AVest  Indies  could  find  their  Avay  to  Europe  only  under 
a  neutral  flag,  or  at  great  risk  and  expense.  The  position  of 
the  United  States  Avith  regard  to  the  West  Indies  and  the 
long  established  trade  Avith  them  naturally  thrcAv  a  large  pro- 
portion of  their  commerce  into  the  hands  of  the  new  republic. 
Many  Americans  also  engaged  in  the  more  distant  trade  of  the 
East  Indies  and  other  parts  of  the  Avorld.  Sugar,  coffee,  spirits, 
cocoa,  pimento,  indigo,  pepper,  and  spices  of  all  kinds  were 
carried  directly  to  Europe  or  Avere  first  brought  to  the  United 
States   and   then   re-exported   to    Europe.^ 

To  this  trade  Great  Britain  objected,  for  orders  in  council 
affecting  neutral  trade  began  to  be  issued  as  early  as  1789. 
With  the  rencAved  outbreak  of  the  war  in  1803,  folloAving  the 
temporary  peace  of  Amiens,  hoAveA^er,  her  objections  grcAv 
stronger.    In  the  cases  of  the  Immanuel  and  Polly,  Sir  William 

1   Pitkin,  Timothy,  Statistical  Tiei':  of  the  Commerce  of  the  United  States  of  America, 
pp.  165,  166. 


10        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

Scott  had  laid  down  the  general  principle  that  in  spite  of  the 
Kule  of  1756  which  declared  that  "when  a  nation  closed  its 
colonies  to  other  nations  in  time  of  peace,  it  had  no  right  to 
open  them  in  time  of  war,  and  that  if  it  did,  all  such  com- 
merce was  liable  to  seizure,"  goods  might  be  carried  between 
the  colony  and  the  mother  country  if  the  voyage  was  broken 
by  landing  the  goods  in  the  United  States  and  passing  them 
through  the  custom  houses.  In  the  case  of  the  Essex,  July, 
1805,  Scott,  however,  decided  that  the  intention  of  the  shipper 
must  be  taken  into  consideration.  If  that  intention  was  to 
carry  the  goods  from  the  mother  country  to  the  colony  or  from 
the  colony  to  the  mother  country,  he  held  that  landing  the 
goods  in  a  neutral  port,  satisfying  custom-house  formalities, 
or  even  thoroughly  repairing  the  vessel  while  there,  made 
absolutely  no  difference.  If  the  intention  was  to  carry  on  a 
trade  denied  during  peace,  the  cargo,  he  said,  was  good 
prize.^ 

Such  a  contention,  if  persisted  in,  would  wreck  the  Ameri- 
can trade.  This  trade  which  had  grown  rapidly  since  1803 
reached  its  high  point  in  1807.  It  had  increased  our  tonnage, 
filled  the  pockets  of  individuals,  and  aided  the  public  treasury. 
In  the  years  1805,  1806,  and  1807  the  value  of  the  exports 
of  domestic  i)roduce  and  manufacture  was  $134,590,552,  or  an 
average  of  $44,863,517  per  year;  during  the  same  years  the 
exports  of  foreign  produce  and  manufacture  amounted  to 
$173,105,813  or  an  average  of  $57,701,937  per  year.  Re-exports 
thus  exceeded  domestic  exports  by  $38,515,261  for  the  three 
years  or  $12,938,420  per  year.^ 

In  each  of  the  years  1806  and  1807  more  than  one  hundred 
and  forty-three  million  pounds  of  sugar  were  exported  from 
the  United  States.  Nearly  all  this  sugar  was  imported  and 
then  re-exported  in  American  vessels.  The  tonnage  employed 
was  approximately  seventy  thousand,  and  the  freight  charges 
on  the  cargoes  in  the  two  different  voyages  amounted  to  prob- 
ably three  or  four  million  dollars.     The  largest  part  of  the 


2  Channing,  E.,  The  Jeffersonian  System,  pp.  197,  198.  The  interpretation  of  the 
Rule  of  1756  is  that  given  by  Fish,  C.  R.  in  American  Diplomacy,  p.  112.  The  ex- 
planation of  the  judicial  decisions,  however,  is  taken  from  Professor  Channing. 

3  Pitkin,  T.,  op.  cit.,  166. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  11 

sugar  was  sent  to  Holland,  France,  Italy,  Spain,  and  Hamburg 
and  Bremen. 

Another  important  re-export  was  coffee.  The  amount  ex- 
ported, on  an  average  for  the  years  1804,  1805,  1806,  and 
1807  was  over  forty-five  million  pounds.  The  principal  desti- 
nations to  which  it  was  sent  were  Holland,  France,  Italy, 
Hamburg   and    Bremen,    and    Great   Britain,      For   the   years 

1805,  1806,  and  1807,  the  annual  quantity  of  wine  exported 
was  3,423,485  gallons;  of  spirits,  1,600,301  gallons;  of  tea, 
2,151,385  pounds;  of  cocoa,  5,937,654  pounds;  and  of  pepper, 
5,292,791  pounds. 

That  this  carrying  trade  added  much  to  our  national  wealth 
is  evident.  Shipbuilding  was  encouraged;  private  fortunes 
were  built;  the  public  coffers  were  filled.  Many  of  the  goods 
and  other  articles  were  not  entitled  to  a  "drawback,"  or  a 
return  of  part  or  all  of  the  duties  paid,  because  the  owners 
had  not  complied  with  the  law.  The  duties  collected  on  articles 
re-exported,  without  the  "drawback,"  and  naturally  not  paid 
by  consumers  in  the  United  States  amounted  to  $1,531,618 
in  1805,  $1,297,535  in  1806,  and  $1,393,877  in  1807.  The  total 
for  the  three  years  was  thus  $4,223,030  or  over  $1,407,676  per 
year.  A  duty  of  three  and  a  half  per  cent  retained  on  the 
"drawbacks"  amounted  to  $328,144.79  in  1805,  $334,247.39  in 

1806,  and  $368,275.50  in  1807.  These  figures  added  to  the 
previous  ones  will  give  a  total  of  $5,253,697.68  or  $1,751,232.56 
per  year  contributed  to  the  public  treasury  and  not  paid  for 
by  the  people  of  the  United  States,  or  an  amount  equal  to 
one  ninth  of  all  duties  collected  or  secured  during  the  period.* 

A  more  detailed  study  of  the  trade  of  the  United  States 
with  some  of  the  leading  countries  of  the  world  for  the  years 
1805,  1806,  and  1807  may  be  of  interest.  The  value  of  the 
exports  of  products  sent  to  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  was, 
for  domestic  produce,  $13,939,663  in  1805;  $12,737,913  in  1806; 
and  $21,122,332  in  1807;  the  corresponding  figures  for  the 
foreign  produce  were  $1,472,600,  $2,855,583,  and  $2,027,650. 
The  resulting  annual  totals  were  $15,412,263,  $15,593,496,  and 
$23,149,982.    The  grand  total  for  the  three  years  was  $54,155,- 


4  Pitkin,  T.,  op.  cil.,  pp.   168-175. 


12        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

741  or  over  $18,051,913  per  year.  The  principal  articles  ex- 
ported to  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  were :  cotton,  tobacco, 
rice,  sometimes  wheat  and  flour,  flax  seed,  naval  stores  such  as 
pitch,  tar,  and  turpentine,  timber  and  planks,  staves  and 
heading,  pot  and  pearl  ashes,  and  whale  and  spermaceti  oil. 
Our  importations  from  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  were  largely 
manufactured  goods  of  various  kinds  including  wool,  cotton, 
silk,  flax,  brass,  copper,  earthen  ware,  haberdashery,  iron,  steel, 
lead,  hats,  salt,  tin,  pewter,  coal,  beer,  ale,  and  porter.  British 
produce  and  manufacture  exported  to  the  United  States 
amounted  to  £11,716,620  in  1806  and  £11,119,048  in  1807.  Be- 
sides, in  these  years  foreign  merchandise  was  exported  from 
Great  Britain  to  the  United  States  to  the  value  of  £458,875 
and  £253,822.  The  totals  were  thus  £12,175,495  and  £11,372,- 
870.  The  imports  and  exports  of  the  United  States  were 
greater  in  1806  and  1807  than  in  any  former  year.  Probably 
about  one-third  of  the  goods  imported  from  Great  Britain, 
especially  in  1806,  was  exported  again  to  the  West  Indies, 
South  America,  or  elsewhere.  Since  the  value  of  exports  was 
determined  by  the  price  of  the  articles  at  the  place  of  ex- 
portation, the  balance  of  trade  against  us  was  not  so  great 
as  appeared.  Many  of  the  articles  were  bulky  and  were  car- 
ried by  our  own  vessels.  Thus  in  1807,  489  American  ships 
with  a  tonnage  of  123,545  cleared  from  Liverpool.  The  cost 
of  transportation  and  a  reasonable  profit  to  the  shipper,  then 
estimated  at  about  twenty  per  cent,  should  be  added  to  the 
value  of  the  exports.  The  balance  was  paid  by  the  trade  with 
the  West  Indies  and  other  parts  of  the  world.^ 

A  branch  of  the  British  trade  that  deserves  particular  men- 
tion is  that  with  the  British  West  Indies.  During  the  colon- 
ial period  this  trade  had  been  particularly  important.  In  fact, 
the  Sugar  Act  of  1764  which  had  well-nigh  closed  the  trade 
and  shut  off  the  specie  which  we  had  used  in  paying  for 
British  manufactured  goods  coupled  with  the  prohibition  of 
the  issue  of  paper  money,  was  probably  a  more  important 
cause  of  the  Revolutionary  War  than  the  Stamp  Act  of  1765. 
After  the  winning  of  independence  further  restrictions  were 

5   Ibid.,   pp.    196-208. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  13 

placed  on  the  British  West  India  trade,  but  nevertheless  large 
quantities  of  our  lumber,  fish,  flour,  beef,  pork,  horses,  live 
cattle,  Indian  corn  and  meal,  peas,  beans,  etc.  found  their  way 
from  time  to  time  to  the  British  West  Indies.  Probably  half 
of  our  lumber  exports  went  to  the  British  West  Indies  in 
1805,  1806,  and  1807.  Staves  and  heading  to  the  number  of 
15,408,000  were  sent  there  in  1805,  20,645,000  in  1806,  and 
16,800,000  in  1807.  In  the  same  years  nearly  twice  as  many 
shingles  were  sent  there  as  to  all  other  places:  41,784,000  in 
1805,  52,506,000  in  1806,  and  43,501,000  in  1807.  Approxi- 
mately one  half  our  boards  and  planks  were  also  sent  to  the 
British  West  Indies.  The  figures  were  36,975,000  in  1805, 
42,096,000  in  1806,  and  36,205,000  in  1807.«  Large  quantities 
of  fish  and  flour,  but  a  much  smaller  proportion  of  the  totals, 
Avere  also  exported  to  the  British  West  Indies.  In  1807,  251,706 
barrels  of  flour  were  exported  to  these  islands.  The  value  of 
the  flour,  bread  and  biscuit,  exported,  1802-1804,  averaged 
about  two  million  dollars  yearly;  of  beef,  pork,  bacon,  and 
lard  eight  hundred  thousand.  The  quantity  of  rum  imported 
during  the  same  period  was  about  four  million  gallons,  valued 
at  two  and  one-half  million  dollars.  The  number  of  gallons 
imported  during  1805-1807  averaged  about  4,614,000  yearly. 
The  value  of  our  exports  to  the  British  West  Indies  averaged 
$6,056,259.33,  1802-1804 ;  our  imports  $4,572,979,  and  our  total 
commerce  $10,629,238.33.  Since  our  own  ships  were  employed 
in  this  trade,  the  profits  and  advantages  went  largely  to  Am- 
erican merchants.'^ 

Many  British  writers  inclined  to  the  view  that  their  British 
West  Indies  could  be  largely  supplied  from  their  North  Am- 
erican colonies,  but  they  were  not  so  supplied  previous  to  the 
American  embargo.  For  the  years  1804-1806,  the  average 
amount  furnished,  according  to  Pitkin,  was: 

6  Ibid.,  pp.  95-99. 

7  Ibid.,  pp.  214-217. 


14        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

From  the  British         Great  Britain  Other 

U.  S.  Provinces  and  Ireland  Countries 
Flour,  meal,  and  bread 

(cwt.)  463,505  2,789  34,495  7,667 
Corn,  oats,  peas,  and 

beans   (bu.)                     406,189  3,276  183,168                4,432 

Eice  (bbls.)                           11,740  6  50                    139 

Pork  and  beef  (bbls.)  54,114  1,642  54,571  385 
Fish,  dry  cod,  etc. 

(cwt.)  138,484  101,692  3,302  3,298 
Fish,  salt  or  pickled 

(bbls.)                                  38,171  27,800  57,698                    991 

Butter   (lirkins)                      8,050  204  49,818                      80 

Cows  and  oxen                      4,145  3  8                 1 123 

Sheep  and  hogs  3,484  44  314 
Oak  and  pine  boards 

and  timber  (ft.)         39,022,997  942,122  101,330 

Staves   (pieces)              17,605,687  525,026  264,500 

Shingles                           43,051,704  332,925  13,0008 

A  careful  examination  of  the  above  table  shows  that  in  only 
three  items,  the  exportation  of  butter,  salt  or  pickled  fish,  and 
pork  and  beef,  did  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  lead  the  United 
States.  In  the  first  case  her  exports  were  over  six  times  as 
great,  in  the  second  about  fifty  per  cent  more,  but  in  the  third 
case  less  than  one  per  cent  greater.  In  all  other  cases,  the 
imports  of  the  British  West  Indies  from  the  United  States 
led  all  other  imports  combined  by  substantial  margins.  Thus 
over  nine-tenths  of  the  flour,  meal  and  bread  came  from  the 
United  States,  two-thirds  of  the  corn,  oats,  peas,  and  beans, 
practically  all  of  the  rice,  three-fourths  of  the  cows  and  oxen, 
over  ninety  per  cent  of  the  sheep  and  hogs,  and  practically 
all  of  the  lumber. 

The  trade  of  the  United  States  with  France  and  her  depen- 
dencies was  important  during  this  period.  The  principal  ex- 
ports were  cotton,  tobacco,  rice,  dried  fish,  whale  and  spermaceti 
oil,  pot  and  pearl  ashes,  and  naval  stores  of  the  domestic 
produce,  and  of  foreign  origin,  sugar,  coffee,  teas,  cocoa,  pep- 
per, and  other  spices.  The  principal  imports  were  wines, 
brandies,  silks,  olive  oil,  and  jewelry  of  various  kinds.  During 
the  years  1804-1807  the  average  value  of  the  exports  of  do- 

8  Ibid.,   p.   218.  • 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  15 

mestie  produce  was  $3,060,203.25,  but  of  foreign  produce   it 
was  $8,500,979  or  nearly  three  times  as  great.^ 

Ordinarily  France  imposed  restrictions  on  foreign  trade  with 
her  West  India  possessions.  Like  Great  Britain  she  admitted 
all  kinds  of  lumber,  live  provisions,  vegetables,  rice,  pitch,  and 
tar  because  she  could  not  supply  those  articles  herself.  Great 
Britain  generally  excluded  American  beef,  pork,  and  dried  fish, 
but  France  admitted  American  beef  and  dried  cod  fish,  though 
she  subjected  them  to  an  additional  duty  of  three  livres  on 
each  quintal  in  order  to  encourage  her  own  fisheries.  England 
allowed  the  importation  of  flour,  bread,  biscuit,  and  various 
grains,  but  France,  by  a  general  law,  excluded  flour  and  all 
grains  except  Indian  corn.  France  allowed  her  colonies  to 
send  only  rum  and  molasses  to  the  United  States;  Great 
Britain  permitted  not  only  rum  and  molasses,  but  also  sugar, 
coffee,  cocoa  nuts,  ginger,  and  pimentos  to  come.  The  latter, 
in  order  to  increase  her  naval  supremacy,  confined  both  imports 
and  exports  to  her  own  vessels.  Since  the  former  had  few 
ships,  she  allowed  the  products  to  go  in  American  vessels.  Her 
policy  was  to  monopolize  the  articles  themselves;  that  of  Great 
Britain  was  to  monopolize  the  carriage  of  the  articles.  The 
former  reserved  the  most  valuable  products  for  consumption 
at  home  and  to  augment  the  national  wealth.  During  the  wars 
many  restrictions,  particularly  those  of  France,  were  not  en- 
forced. The  average  value  of  the  American  exports  of  domes- 
tic production  to  the  French  West  Indies  and  American  col- 
onies, 1804-1807,  was  $2,572,660  and  of  exports  of  foreign 
produce,  $3,316,762.25." 

The  exports  to  Spain  consisted  largely  of  fish,  flour,  whale 
oil,  rice,  and  tobacco  of  the  domestic  produce  and  of  cocoa, 
coffee,  sugar,  pepper,  and  other  spices  of  foreign  produce. 
The  imports  from  Spain  were  largely  brandies,  wines,  fruits 
of  various  kinds,  and  salt.  The  exports  of  domestic  produce 
averaged  $1,793,963,  1804-1807,  and  the  exports  of  foreign 
produce  $1,890,079.  It  is  noteworthy,  however,  that  in  1804 
the  exports  of  domestic  produce  were  four  times  as  great  as 
those  of  foreign  produce,  while  in  1807  the  exports  of  foreign 

9  Ibid.,  pp.  219-223. 

10  Ibid.,   pp.   223-226. 


16        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

produce  were  three  times  as  great  as  those  of  domestic  pro- 
duce. During  these  four  years,  too,  the  value  of  exports  of 
domestic  origin  fell  half  while  the  exports  of  foreign  produce 
increased  about  six  fold.^^ 

During  the  European  wars  our  trade  with  the  Spanish  AVest 
Indies  and  the  American  colonies  increased  greatly.  Our 
shippers  carried  the  products  of  the  Spanish  islands,  and,  in 
large  part,  supplied  those  islands  with  the  various  manufac- 
tures of  Europe.  Our  exports  of  domestic  produce  to  the 
Spanish  West  Indies  and  American  colonies  averaged  $2,348,- 
354.50  during  1804-1807;  the  exports  of  foreign  produce  aver- 
aged $6,102,147  for  the  same  period.  In  1804  the  exports 
of  domestic  produce  were  nearly  forty-seven  per  cent  greater 
than  those  of  foreign  produce.  In  1807,  however,  the  latter 
were  about  three  hundred  per  cent  greater.  During  the  four 
years  the  value  of  exports  of  domestic  origin  increased  forty- 
three  per  cent;  during  the  same  period  the  value  of  expons 
of  foreign  origin  increased  nearly  739  per  cent.  Naturally 
American  shippers  made  fortunes  from  this  carrying  trade.^^ 

As  a  general  thing  the  United  States  exported  wheat,  flour, 
corn,  rice,  dried  fish,  whale  oil,  soap,  and  staves  and  heading 
to  Portugal  and  Madeira.  She  received  in  return  wines,  fruit, 
and  salt.  The  exports  to  Portugal  were  small  as  compared 
with  those  to  Spain,  and  unlike  the  latter  in  that  the  exports 
of  articles  of  domestic  produce  exceeded  in  value  the  exports 
of  foreign  produce.  The  value  of  the  former  was  $1,282,169 
in  1804,  $508,284  in  1805,  $920,841  in  1806,  and  $829,313  in 
1807;  the  value  of  exports  of  foreign  produce  for  the  same 
years  was  $190,716,  $851,647,  $857,050,  and  $159,173.  The 
average  was  thus  seventy-two  per  cent  greater  for  the  former, 
or  $885,151.75  as  compared  to  $514,646.50.  In  only  one  of  the 
years,  1805,  did  the  exports  of  foreign  produce  exceed  those 
of  domestic  produce;  in  1804  the  latter  were  about  six  times 
as  great  and  in  1807  over  five  times  as  great.^^ 
x  Trade  with  northern  Europe  was  not  so  important  as  trade 
with    southwestern    Europe.      Among    our    exports    to    Russia 

11  Ibid.,  pp.  226-228. 

12  Ibid.,  pp.   228-230. 
1*   Ibid.,   pp.   230,   231. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  17 

were  cotton,  rice,  tobacco,  and  spirits  of  domestic  origin,  and 
sugar  and  coffee,  with  some  pepper,  tea,  and  cocoa  of  foreign 
origin.  The  exports  of  domestic  origin  were  worth  $12,04-1 
in  1805,  $3,580  in  1806,  and  $78,850  in  1807;  the  exports  of 
foreign  origin  were  worth  in  the  same  years  $59,328,  $8,827, 
and  $366,367.  The  average  value  of  the  former  was  $31,491.33 
and  of  the  latter  $144,840.67.  Iron,  hemp,  cordage,  duck  and 
various  kinds  of  hemp  and  flax  such  as  drillings,  diapers, 
broad  and  narrow  tickings,  sheetings,  etc.  were  returned  in 
exchange.  The  average  amount  of  goods  paying  duties  accord- 
ing to  Russian  value  and  including  iron,  hemp,  flax,  etc.  was 
$1,302,217  for  1802,  1803,  and  1804.  Of  this  amount,  hemp 
was  worth  over  half  or  $779,473.  In  1807  the  amount  of  our 
imports  from  Russia  was  $1,804,000  or  about  four  times  as 
great  as  our  exports  which  amounted  to  $445,217." 

Commerce  with  Sweden  was  small  until  the  adoption  of 
commercial  restrictions.  As  in  the  case  of  Russia  we  bought 
more  from  Sweden  than  we  sold  her,  though  the  discrepancy 
was  not  so  great.  Our  principal  exports  were  tobacco  and  rice ; 
our  principal  import  was  iron.  The  trade  with  the  Swedish 
West  Indies,  however,  was  much  greater.  Thus  from  1795  to 
1801  our  exports  to  them  were  more  than  eleven  times  as  grea't 
as  to  Sweden,  and  the  value  of  our  imports  from  them  was 
over  six  times  as  great;  the  averages  were  six  hundred  and 
eighty-five  thousand  dollars  and  five  hundred  thousand.  In 
1807  we  exported  to  the  Swedish  West  Indies  $416,509  worth 
of  domestic  produce  and  $911,155  worth  of  foreign  produce. 
In  the  same  year  we  imported  92,858  gallons  of  rum,  37,764 
gallons  of  molasses,  2,752,412  pounds  of  sugar,  and  1,705,670 
pounds  of  coffee.^^ 

Greater  than  the  trade  with  Sweden  w^as  the  trade  with 
Denmark  and  Norway.  The  average  value  of  the  exports  of 
the  United  States  to  the  two  countries  from  1795  to  1801  was 
about  six  hundred  thousand  dollars ;  the  imports  from  them 
for  the  same  period  averaged  four  hundred  thousand  dollars. 
During  the  years  1805,  1806,  and  1807  the  exports  of  domestic 
produce  were  worth  $435,926,  $356,595,  and  $572,150  respec- 

14  Ibid.,  pp.  232-235. 

15  Ibid.,  pp.  235,  236. 


18        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

tively;  the  exports  of  foreign  produce  for  the  same  years  were 
$1,481,767,  $1,052,954,  and  $836,468.  The  average  of  each  for 
the  three  year  period  was  $454,890.33  and  $1,123,729.67.  Cot- 
ton, tobacco,  rice,  and  sugar  were  the  principal  exports.  The 
trade  with  the  Danish  West  Indies  was  even  greater  than  the 
trade  with  Denmark  itself.  The  average  value  of  the  exports 
of  domestic  origin,  1804-1807,  was  $1,407,366 ;  of  foreign  origin, 
$1,025,976.25.  During  the  four  year  period  the  exports  of 
the  former  increased  about  fifty  per  cent,  whereas  the  latter 
increased  over  one  hundred  and  thirty-four  per  cent.  Never- 
theless, in  not  one  of  the  four  years  did  the  exports  of  foreign 
produce  exceed  the  exports  of  domestic  produce." 

During  the  European  wars  the  trade  of  the  United  States 
with  Hamburg  and  Bremen,  especially  the  former,  was  very 
great.  The  Elbe  and  Weser  and  other  waters  carried  the 
manufactures  of  Germanj^  especially  linens,  from  their  place 
of  origin  to  Hamburg,  the  great  depot  of  this  commerce.  The 
products  received  in  exchange  from  the  United  States  were 
tobacco,  rice,  cotton,  spirits  from  molasses,  whale  oil,  pot  and 
pearl  ashes,  sugar,  coffee,  teas,  cocoa,  pepper,  and  other  spices. 
Until  Napoleon  got  control  of  the  cities  the  trade  was  valuable 
far  beyond  the  imagination  of  most  persons.  For  the  years 
1795-1801  the  average  value  of  our  exports  to  those  cities  was 
$11,542,625.43  and  of  our  imports  from  them  $3,821,131.57. 
The  high  point  came  in  1799  when  our  exports  were  valued 
at  $17,144,400  and  our  imports  at  $6,919,425.  The  total  value 
of  our  exports  of  domestic  origin  for  1804-1807  was  $4,427,725 
or  $1,106,931.25  per  year;  the  total  value  of  the  exports  of 
foreign  produce  during  the  same  period  was  $12,864,296,  or 
$3,216,074  per  year.  The  exports  of  1799  alone  were  thus 
practically  equal  to  those  of  the  four  years,  1804-1807." 

The  trade  with  Holland  was  also  particularly  important  to 
the  American  merchants.  Of  course,  as  with  other  countries, 
restrictions  of  the  warring  powers  interfered  more  or  less,  but 
evasion  was  not  particularly  difficult,  and  many  a  fortune  was 
made.  For  the  years,  1804-1807,  the  average  value  of  the 
exports  of  domestic  origin  from  the  United  States  to  Holland 

16  Ibid.,  pp.  237-239. 

17  Ibid.,  pp.  239-241. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  19 

was  $2,638,964.75,  and  of  foreign  origin  $13,713,551.75.  The 
articles  of  domestic  produce  usually  exported  were  tobacco, 
rice,  cotton,  pot  and  pearl  ashes,  whale  oil,  and  spirits  from 
molasses.  For  the  years  1804-1807,  213,803,691  pounds  of 
sugar,  or  53,450,922%  pounds  per  year,  were  shipped  to 
Holland;  of  this  amount  178,859,694  pounds,  or  about  eighty- 
four  per  cent,  was  brown.  During  the  same  years  the  coffee 
exported  amounted  to  91,511,826  pounds,  or  22,877,9561/2 
pounds  per  year.  The  usual  imports  from  Holland  were  wool- 
ens, linens,  spirits  from  grain,  nails,  spikes,  manufactures  of 
lead,  paints,  steel,  cheese,  glass,  anchors,  shot,  slit  and  hoop 
iron.  For  the  years  1802,  1803,  and  1804  the  average  amount 
of  goods  paying  ad  valorem  duties  was  $1,110,354;  in  1807 
it  was  $1,881,741.  For  these  three  years  the  amount  of  gin 
imported  into  the  United  States  was  1,059,540  gallons ;  in  1807, 
it  was  1,463,000  gallons.  The  exports  usually  far  exceeded 
the  imports  in  value ;  the  balance  was  generally  paid  in  bills 
of  exchange  on  England  and  other  parts  of  Europe.^* 

The  commerce  of  the  United  States  with  the  Dutch  West 
Indies  was  less  important  than  the  trade  with  the  mother 
country.  The  exports  of  domestic  produce,  1804-1807,  amount- 
ed to  $3,121,867  or  $780,466.75  per  year;  the  exports  of  foreign 
produce  during  the  same  period  amounted  to  $1,761,001  or 
$440,250.25  per  year.  The  total  exports  in  the  first  year  were 
worth  a  little  more  than  those  in  the  other  three  years  com- 
bined. The  United  States  imported  large  quantities  of  coffee, 
sugar,  pepper  and  other  spices  from  the  Dutch  East  Indies; 
they  were  paid  for  in  money,  bills  of  exchange,  or  cargoes 
shipped  from  Europe.  When  the  Dutch  were  compelled  to 
engage  in  the  European  wars,  this  trade  was  thrown  into  the 
hands  of  the  American  merchants.  In  1801,  it  was  valued 
at  $4,430,733.  In  1804,  8,395,783  pounds  of  coffee  valued  at 
$2,098,945  were  imported  from  the  Dutch  East  Indies  and 
the  Cape  of  Good  Hope;  in  1807,  the  amount  imported  was 
8,842,568  pounds.  In  1804,  4,946,284  pounds  of  pepper  were 
imported;  in   1807,   2,508,897  pounds.^'-* 

The  trade  of  the  United  States  with  Italy  was  of  some  im- 

18  Ibid.,   pp.   241-243. 

19  Ibid.,  pp.   243-245. 


20        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

portance.  The  exports  were  dried  fish,  sugar,  coffee,  pepper, 
and  cocoa;  the  imports  were  silks,  wines,  brandies,  fruit,  lead, 
and  cheese.  The  exports  for  the  seven  years,  1795-1801, 
amounted  to  $10,362,391 ;  during  the  same  period  the  imports 
amounted  to  $4,925,230,  or  less  than  half  as  much  as  the  ex- 
ports. By  far  the  larger  part  of  the  exports  were  those  of 
foreign  origin.  In  1804  they  were  worth  $1,552,708;  in  1805, 
$2,320,099;  in  1806,  $4,587,727;  in  1807,  $5,499,722.  For  the 
same  years  the  exports  of  domestic  origin  amounted  to  $118,441, 
$142,475,  $185,346,  and  $250,257.  The  latter  amounted  to 
$696,519  for  the  four  years;  the  former,  to  $13,960,256,  or 
more  than  twenty  times  as  mueh.^° 

Our  trade  with  China  began  soon  after  the  Revolutionary 
War.  The  first  American  vessel  to  engage  in  this  trade  left 
New  York,  February  22,  1784  and  returned  May  11,  1785. 
This  vessel  of  360  tons  was  small,  but  not  for  that  day.  It 
was  commanded  by  Captain  John  Green  and  Samuel  Shaw. 
The  Americans  were  favorably  received  by  the  Chinese  govern- 
ment, and  thereafter  our  trade  increased.  In  1789  fifteen  Am- 
erican vessels  were  at  Canton.  No  other  nation,  save  Great 
Britain,  had  a  larger  number.  Our  principal  imports  from 
China  were  teas,  silks,  nankeens,  and  China  ware.  Tea  was 
the  most  valuable.  The  imports  of  tea,  1790-1800,  amounted 
to  28,000,548  pounds,  or  an  average  of  2,545,504  pounds  a  year. 
Much  of  this,  however,  was  re-exported.  During  the  years 
1804-1807  the  amount  imported  was  23,721,849  pounds,  the 
amount  exported  7,673,389  pounds,  and  the  amount  consumed 
16,048,460  pounds.  The  average  value  of  goods  paying  ad 
valorem  duties,  nankeens,  all  silk  and  cotton  goods,  and  China 
ware,  imported  from  China  and  other  Asiatic  powers,  1802- 
1804,  was  about  $2,300,000;  for  the  years  1805-1807,  it  was 
$1,938,240.  The  balance  of  trade  was  decidedly  against  the 
United  States,  for  few  articles,  domestic  or  foreign,  were  ship- 
ped direct  from  the  United  States  to  China.  Payments  were 
made,  as  a  usual  thing,  in  specie,  or  in  seal-skins  taken  in 
the  South  Seas  and  furs  obtained  on  the  northwest  coast  of 
America.  These  were  carried  direct  to  China  without  being 
brought  to  the  United  States.  The  first  voyage  of  this  kind 
undertaken  by  an  American  was  that  of  Captain  Kendriek  of 

20  Ibid.,  pp.  245,   246. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBAEGO,  1807-1809 


21 


Boston  in  1789.  High  prices  obtained  for  furs  tempted  others, 
but  the  hunting  was  overdone,  and  the  seal  soon  became  so 
scarce  as  to  be  hardly  worth  the  pursuit. ^^ 

The  total  value  of  all  the  goods  imported  into  the  United 
States  for  the  year  ending  September  30,  1807,  was  $138,574,- 
876.84.  The  twelve  most  important  articles  or  groups,  exclu- 
sive of  goods  subject  to  advalorem  duties,  were : 


Sugars 

Coffee 

Alcoholic  liquors 

Tea 

Molasses 

Cocoa 

Hemp 

Indigo 

Salt 

Fish 

Spices 

Cotton 


$23,441,663.60 
16,470,947.08 
15,311,132.94 
5,117,706.32 
3,064,044.24 
2,297,961.00 
2,116,605.00 
1,849,529.76 
1,676,694.81 
1,368,821.00 
1,201,092.35 
1,047,139.7022 

In  order  to  show  more  clearly  the  value  of  the  export  carry- 
ing trade  during  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  the 
following  table  is  given: 

Europe  Asia 

Years  Domestic  Foreign  Domestic  Foreign 

1801  $27,569,699  $31,380,558  $371,737  $1,136,517 

1802  19,904,389  23,575,108  547,386  820,423 

1803  25,939,111  8,561,834  292,593  149,600 

1804  23,094,946  27,468,725  546,278  830,223 

1805  23,640,776  36,341,320  612,683  2,156,229 

1806  24,384,020  40,267,711  514,621  1,968,860 

1807  31,012,947  38,882,633  497,769  1,598,445 


Africa 


West  Indies,  Am.  Cont.,  etc. 


Years 
1801 
1802 
1803 

1804 
1805 
1806 
1807 


Domestic 

^      934,331 

747,544 

636,106 

1,264,737 

1,359,518 

1,371,475 

1,296,375 


Foreign 

;      756,445 

411,855 

148,004 

681,499 

1,726,987 

901,916 

1,627,177 


Domestic 

$17,482,025 
14,982,854 
15,338,151 
16,561,516 
16,774,025 
14,983,611 
15,892,501 


Foreign 

$13,369,201 

10,967,585 

4,734,634 

7,251,150 

12,954,483 

17,144,759 

17,535,30323 


21  Ibid.,   pp.   246-249. 

22  Compiled  from  table  in   ibid.,  pp.  256,  257. 

23  Jbid.,  pp.   275,  276. 


22        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

The  average  amount  of  exports  of  domestic  produce  for  1805, 
1806,  and  1807  was  $44,863,198,  and  of  foreign  produce 
$57,701,937.  About  three-fifths  of  the  exports  of  domestic 
origin  went  to  Europe,  four-elevenths  to  the  West  Indies  and 
American  continent,  but  less  than  one-twentieth  to  Asia  and 
Africa.  In  1807,  our  total  exports  were  estimated  at  $108,343,- 
J50  and  our  imports  at  $138,574,876.84.  In  that  year,  how- 
ever, the  value  of  imports  was  calculated  from  the  prices  at 
which  these  articles,  when  exported,  were  valued  at  the  custom 
house.  From  this  method  of  calculation  and  from  the  fact 
that  American  merchants  had  been  their  own  carriers  for 
years,  there  seems  much  justification  for  Pitkin's  statement, 
"that  the  real  gain  of  the  United  States  has  been  nearly  in 
proportion  as  their  imports  have  exceeded  their  exports."  This 
will  be  made  clearer  by  an  illustration.  An  American  owned 
vessel  carried  five  thousand  barrels  of  flour  for  an  American 
merchant  to  Spain.  This  flour,  valued  at  $9.50  per  barrel, 
made  the  cargo  worth  $47,500  at  the  place  of  exportation.  In 
Spain,  however,  the  flour  brought  fifteen  dollars  a  barrel  or 
seventy-five  thousand  dollars.  The  difference,  $27,500,  arose 
from  necessary  charges  as  freight,  insurance,  commissions, 
profits,  etc.  With  the  proceeds  brought  directly  home  the 
value  of  the  imports  arising  would  obviously  be  seventy-five 
thousand  dollars,  and  the  difference  between  that  sum  and 
$47,500,  or  $27,500  was  gain  for  the  United  States  and  its 
citizens.  The  returns,  however,  usually  came  in  foreign  articles 
rather  than  money  alone.  Freight  and  other  expenses  on  the 
return  cargo,  with  a  profit  more  or  less  reasonable,  were  count- 
ed in  the  value  of  the  articles  and  thus  increased  "the  'differ- 
ence between  the  estimated  value  of  the  imported  and  exported 
cargo. '  '^* 


24  Ibid.,  pp.  276-281. 


CHAPTER  II 

FOREIGN  RESTRICTIONS  ON  COMMERCE 

As  pointed  out  in  the  previous  chapter,  American  commerce 
thrived  during  the  early  phases  of  the  European  conflict. 
While  England  and  France  were  fighting  for  military,  naval, 
and  commercial  supremacy,  the  United  States  was  reaping  a 
rich  harvest.  Her  combined  exports  and  imports  increased 
from  forty-eight  million  dollars  in  1791  to  two  hundred  and 
five  million  dollars  in  1801,  and  after  a  temporarj^  decline, 
1802-1803,  to  two  hundred  and  forty-seven  million  in  1807. 
During  the  latter  part  of  this  period  freight  earnings  amounted 
to  $32,.500,000  per  year.  The  United  States  was  thus  rapidly 
pushing   towards   commercial    supremacy.^ 

However,  after  the  lull  in  European  warfare,  1802-1803,  the 
fighting  broke  out  with  greater  fury  than  ever,  and  lasted, 
with  scarcely  a  respite,  until  Napoleon's  overthrow  at  Waterloo 
in  June,  1815.  During  this  period  restriction  after  restriction 
was  placed  on  neutral  commerce,  not  primarily  with  the  inten- 
tion of  destroying  neutrals,  but  of  injuring  the  enemy.  In  a 
life  and  death  struggle  then,  as  well  as  in  more  recent  years, 
however,  the  warring  parties  were  not  scrupulous  in  their  ob- 
servance  of  the  rights  of  others. 

From  March  25,  1793,  through  October  14,  1808,  there  were 
thirty-one  acts  or  orders  in  council  by  Great  Britain  which 
affected  the  United  States.^  Only  those  of  1806,  1807,  and 
1808  will  be  considered  here.  On  April  8,  1806,  the  principal 
Secretary  of  State  for  Foreign  Affairs,  Charles  James  Fox, 
wrote  James  Monroe,  our  minister  to  England,  that  his 
country  had  determined  to  establish  and  maintain  "the  most 
rigorous  blockade  at  the  entrance  of  the  Ems,  the  Weser,  the 
Elbe,  and  the  Trave."  This  step,  he  held,  was  justified, 
because  the  King  of  Prussia  had  forcibly  taken  possession  of 

1  Bogart,  E.  L.,  Economic  History  of  the  United  States,  pp.  121,  122. 

2  American  State  Papers,  Class  I,  Foreign  Relations,  Vol.   Ill,   p.   263. 

23 


24        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

certain  parts  of  the  electorate  of  Hanover  and  other  territory 
belonging  to  the  English  king,  and  had  given  notice  of  an 
intention  to  exclude  all  British  ships  from  the  ports  of 
Prussia  and  certain  other  parts  of  northern  Europe.'' 

A  little  over  a  month  later,  May  16,  1806,  Fox  again  wrote 
to  Monroe,  this  time  to  notify  him  of  the  blockade  of  the 
European  coast  from  the  river  Elbe  to  the  port  of  Brest 
inclusive.  This  blockade,  however,  was  not  absolute.  Neutral 
ships  laden  with  neutral  goods,  not  contraband  of  war,  could 
trade  with  this  region,  except  from  Ostend  to  the  Seine, 
provided  the  vessels  had  not  been  loaded  in  enemy  ports, 
and  were  not  in  the  possession  of  an  enemy,  and  provided, 
moreover,  that  the  vessels  sailing  from  those  rivers  and  ports 
should  not  be  destined  to  any  territory  in  the  possession  of 
the  enemy,  or  guilty  of  having  previously  broken  the  block- 
ade.* A  few  months  later  September  25,  1806,  this  blockade 
was  so  modified  as  to  allow  a  little  more  trade,  for  Lord 
Howick,  now  principal  Secretary  of  State  for  Foreign  Affairs, 
notified  Monroe  that  "so  much  of  the  blockade  as  extended 
from  the  river  Elbe  to  the  river  Ems,  both  inclusive,  is  for 
the  present  discontinued."-^ 

On  January  7,  1807,  England  forbade  any  vessel  trading 
from  one  port  to  another  if  both  ports  were  in  the  possession 
of  France  or  her  allies,  or  so  far  under  their  control  as  to 
exclude  British  ships  therefrom.  Ships  of  war  and  privateers 
were  instructed  to  warn  neutral  vessels  of  the  blockade.  Ves- 
sels disregarding  the  warning  and  those  sailing  for  such  des- 
tinations after  a  reasonable  length  of  time  for  the  acquisition 
of  information  by  them  had  elapsed  were  subject  to  capture. 
Four  principal  reasons  were  advanced  for  the  action  of  the 
English : 

(1)  The  prohibition  by  France  of  commerce  between 
neutral  nations  to  interfere  or  France  to  retract  her  decrees; 
nations  in  any  article  of  English  growth,  produce,  or  manu- 
facture ; 


3  American  State  Papers,  p.  267. 

4  Ibid.,  p.  267. 

5  Ibid.,   p.   267. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  25 

(2)  The  proclamation  by  France  of  a  ''paper  blockade" 
of  British  dominions; 

(3)  The  unquestionable  right  of  retaliation; 

(4)  The  right  of  defense  of  English  interests  against  un- 
just attacks.^ 

On  June  26,  1807,  David  M.  Erskine,  Envoy  Extraordinary 
and  Minister  Plenipotentiary  of  England  to  the  United  States, 
then  residing  at  Philadelphia,  wrote  to  the  American  Secre- 
tary of  State  that  the  English  king,  because  of  the  French 
success  on  the  continent,  which  enabled  Napoleon  to  command 
the  mouths  of  the  Ems,  Weser,  and  Elbe,  had  seen  fit  to 
reestablish  "the  most  vigorous  blockade  at  the  entrance  of 
those  rivers."^ 

Later  in  the  year  a  proclamation  dated  October  16,  1807, 
was  intended  to  recall  and  prohibit  British  seamen  from 
serving  foreign  princes  and  states.  English  officers  were 
authorized  to  stop  and  search  merchant  ships  for  such  per- 
sons, but  to  refrain  from  unnecessary  violence.  Foreign  war- 
ships were  not  to  be  treated  in  this  way.  Letters  of  naturali- 
zation or  certificates  of  citizenship  from  foreign  states  were 
not  considered  valid  for  native-born  English  subjects.  All 
such  subjects  who  had  taken  out  foreign  citizenship  were 
assured  a  full  and  free  pardon  provided  they  returned  to 
their  allegiance  at  once.  If  they  did  not  do  so,  they  were 
liable  to  punishment  for  contempt.  Masters  of  ships,  pilots, 
marines,  seamen,  shipwrights,  and  other  seafaring  men,  na- 
tive-born subjects  of  Great  Britain,  if  captured  in  foreign 
service  by  the  Algerians  or  other  powers  of  northern  Africa 
and  carried  into  slavery,  would  not  be  reclaimed  as  subjects 
of  Great  Britain.  All  subjects  who  had  entered  or  who 
thereafter  should  voluntarily  enter  into  the  service  of  a  state 
at  war  with  England  were  declared  guilty  of  high  treason 
and  subject  to  the  extreme  penalty  therefor.® 

On  November  11,  1807,  new  and  very  drastic  orders  in  council 
were  issued.     The  reasons  premised  were: 

(1)     French   decrees  declaring   British   Isles  in  a  state   of 

6  Ibid.,  pp.  267,  268. 

7  Ibid.,  p.  268. 

8  Ibid.,  p.  268. 


26        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

blockade  and  subjecting  "to  capture  and  condemnation  all 
vessels  with  their  cargoes  which  should  continue  to  trade 
with  His  Majesty's  dominions;" 

(2)  The  prohibition  by  the  same  order  of  all  trade  in 
English  merchandise,  and  declaration  that  all  merchandise 
belonging  to  England  or  her  colonies  was  lawful  prize; 

(3)  The  assent  to  such  orders  by  all  nations  in  alliance 
with  or  under  the  control  of  France; 

(4)  The  failure  of  the  orders  of  January  7,  1807  to  induce 
neutral  nations  to  interfere  or  France  to  retract  her  degrees; 

(5)  The  necessity  of  taking  stronger  measures  to  secure 
due  respect  for  English  rights. 

The  severity  of  the  orders  is  indicated  by  the  fact  "that 
all  the  ports  and  places  of  France  and  her  allies,"  and  of 
all  colonies  belonging  to  England's  enemies,  were  subjected 
to  the  same  restrictions,  with  certain  exceptions,  as  if  they 
were  actually  blockaded  "in  the  most  strict  and  rigorous 
manner."  Trade  in  the  products  of  those  countries  or  col- 
onies was,  moreover,  declared  unlawful,  and  every  vessel 
violating  the  order  subject  to  capture  and  condemnation  "as 
prize  to  the  captors."^ 

Trade,  however,  as  previously  intimated,  was  allowed  on 
certain  conditions.  A  vessel  of  a  country  not  subject  to  re- 
strictions of  blockade  might  under  certain  prescribed  con- 
ditions carry  the  products  of  its  own  country,  or  trade  from 
a  free  port  in  an  English  colony  to  some  ports  in  enemy  ter- 
ritory, or  from  the  colonies  direct  to  the  country  to  which 
the  vessel  belonged,  or  to  some  free  port  in  an  English  colony, 
"in  such  cases,  and  with  such  articles,  as  it  may  be  lawful 
to  import  into  such  free  port."  The  order,  moreover,  exempt- 
ed vessels  and  cargoes  of  countries  not  at  war  with  England 
provided  they  had  cleared  out  under  regulations  prescribed 
by  the  English  and  proceeded  direct  from  some  place  in 
England,  Gibraltar,  Malta,  or  a  port  of  England's  allies  to 
the  place  specified  in  the  clearance  papers.  Neither  did  the 
order  apply  to  the  vessel  or  cargo  of  a  neutral  coming  from 
a  blockaded  port  to  English  territory,  and  on  a  direct  voyage 
thereto.^*^ 

9  Ibid.,  p.  269. 

10  Ibid.,  p.  269. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  27 

Certain  specified  goods  of  countries  not  at  peace  with 
Great  Britain  were  allowed  to  be  imported  in  neutral  ships 
subject  to  duties  and  liable  to  "drawbacks,"  if  coming  in 
"ships  navigated  according  to  law."  Such  goods  were  to 
be  reported  for  exportation  to  any  neutral  or  any  ally  of 
Great  Britain.  Exportation  and  importation  were  to  be  di- 
rected by  British  license.  A  more  specific  permission,  never- 
theless, was  necessary  for  the  exportation  of  coffee,  sugar, 
Avine,  brandy,  snuff,  and  tobacco.  Orders  of  the  same  day 
declared  illegal  the  sale  to  a  neutral  of  any  vessel  belonging 
to  an  enemy  of  England.'^ 

These  orders  in  council,  though  drastic,  were  considerably 
modified  from  the  early  drafts.  Thus  "the  sweeping  doctrine 
of  retaliation  was  omitted"  because  of  Lord  Bathurst's  ob- 
jections. 

"The  assertion  that  neutrals  had  acquiesced  in  the  Berlin  Decree," 
said  Henry  Adams,  "was  struck  out;  the  preamble  was  reduced,  by  Lord 
Eldon's  advice,  to  a  mere  mention  of  the  French  pretended  blockade, 
and  of  Napoleon's  real  prohibition  of  British  commerce,  followed  by  a 
few  short  paragraphs  reciting  that  Lord  Howick's  order  of  January  7, 
1807  had  not  answered  the  desired  purpose  either  of  compelling  the  enemy 
to  recall  those  orders  or  of  inducing  neutral  nations  to  interpose  with 
effect  to  obtain  their  revocation,  but  on  the  contrary  the  same  have 
been  recently  enforced  with  increased'  vigor;  and  then,  with  the  blunt 
assertion  that  'his  Majesty,  under  these  circumstances,  finds  himself 
compelled  to  take  further  measures  for  asserting  and  vindicating  his 
just  rights,'  Perceval,  without  more  apologies,  ordered  in  effect  that 
all  American  commerce,  except  that  to  Sweden  and  the  West  Indies, 
should  pass  through  some 'British  port  and  take  out  a  British  license.  "12 

The  orders  were  hard  to  comprehend;  British  merchants 
could  not  understand  them.  New  ones  "explaining,  correct- 
ing, and  developing'  Perceval's  not  too  lucid  style"  caused 
the  dissatisfied  Liberals  to  declare  that  the  English  minister 
intended  for  the  merchants  to  pay  "two  guineas  for  a  legal 
opinion,  with  the  benefit  of  a  chance  to  get  a  directly  con- 
trary opinion  for  the  sum  of  two  guineas  more."  The  gen- 
eral understanding  was  that  all  American  commerce  with 
the  enemies  of  England  had  to  go  through  British  ports  Avith 


11  Ibid.,  p.  270. 

12  Adams,   Henry.,  nistory  of  the   United  States,  Vol.   IV,  pp.   102,   103. 


28        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

license,  but  that  all  colonial  products  would  have  to  pay  a 
tax  into  the  British  treasury,  which  would  thereby  increase 
its  price  to  the  enemy.  Cotton,  however,  was  not  allowed  to 
enter  France.  The  general  intention,  nevertheless,  was  clear 
enough.  "After  November  11,  1807,  any  American  vessel 
carrying  any  cargo  was  liable  to  capture  if  it  sailed  for  any 
port  in  Europe  from  which  the  British  flag  was  excluded. 
In  other  words,  American  commerce  was  made  English.  "^^ 
Still,  neither  the  order  in  council  of  November  11  nor  the 
impressment  proclamation  of  October  17  was  regarded  as 
cause  for  war.^* 

On  November  25,  1807  a  new  order  in  council  set  the  date 
at  which  the  orders  of  November  11,  1807  should  be  presumed 
to  have  been  heard  at  certain  places.  If  vessels  sailed  twenty 
days  later  than  that  time,  they  with  their  cargoes  were  ex- 
empt from  seizure,  if  loading  had  commenced  previous  to 
that  period.  If  they  sailed  later  than  that,  they  were  sub- 
ject to  capture,  and  proof  that  the  orders  had  not  been 
received  was  not  allowed  in  the  courts.  Seizure  of  vessels  and 
cargoes    would,    of   course,    result.^^ 

All  neutral  vessels  were  allowed  to  land  in  British  ports 
English  produce  or  manufacture,  East  India  goods,  prize 
goods  lawfully  imported,  and  foreign  goods  or  produce  if 
lawfully  imported  under  a  British  license  previously  granted 
for  that  purpose.  These  goods,  if  clearance  papers  had  been 
obtained,  could  be  taken  to  any  enemy  colony  in  the  West 
Indies  or  America,  subject  to  the  payment  of  export  duties 
to  the  British  treasury,  if  those  colonies  were  not  in  a  state 
of  actual  blockade.  Naval  and  military  stores  were  exempt 
from  this  provision  as  well  as  foreign  sugar,  coffee,  wine, 
brandy,  snuff,  and  cotton.  These — the  last  six  mentioned — 
could,  if  lawfully  imported,  be  exported  to  designated  ports, 
under  special  license,  provided  license  had  been  "previously 
obtained  for  the  exportation  and  conveyance  thereof."  Goods 
had  to  be  duly  entered  and  landed  in  a  British  post,  as  a 
usual   thing.     Neutral   vessels  might   clear    from    Guernsey, 

13  Ibid.,  Vol.  IV,  p.   103. 

14  Ihid.,  Vol.  IV,  p.   104. 

15  American  State  Papers,  Class  I,  Foreign  Relations,  Vol.   Ill,   pp.   270,   271. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  29 

Jersey,  or  Man,  under  restrictions  of  the  order,  to  a  post 
specified  in  the  clearance  papers  if  that  port  was  not  in  a 
state  of  actual  blockade.  They  could  take  articles  legally 
imported  direct  from  any  port  or  place  in  the  kingdom,  if 
said  articles  were  not  naval  or  military  stores.  If  the  ar- 
ticles had  been  imported  to  those  places  from  blockaded 
territory,  they  could  be  taken  only  to  ports  or  places  of  the 
British  kingdom,^^ 

In  order  to  encourage  the  trade  from  Gibraltar  and  Malta 
to  countries  under  restrictions  of  the  order  of  November  11, 
a  new  order  of  November  25,  1807  declared  that  flour,  meal, 
grain,  tobacco,  and  other  articles  in  an  unmanufactured  state, 
if  the  growth  of  a  country  not  subject  to  the  blockade,  save 
only  cotton,  naval,  and  military  stores,  imported  into  Gibral- 
tar or  Malta  direct  from  the  producer  could,  without  any 
license,  be  cleared  out  to  a  port  not  in  actual  blockade  without 
being  first  landed.  Cotton,  no  matter  how  imported,  and 
articles  not  of  English  grov/th  or  manufacture,  or  not  import- 
ed in  a  British  ship  or  from  the  English  kingdom  direct, 
except  fish,  if  laden  after  the  time  for  carrying  the  orders 
of  November  11  into  effect,  should  not  be  exported  from 
Gibraltar  or  Malta  save  to  some  part  of  the  British  king- 
dom. All  other  products  of  the  English  kingdom,  products 
carried  in  a  British  ship,  or  articles  carried  from  some  place 
in  the  British  kingdom,  together  with  fish,  might  be  exported 
to  Mediterranean  or  Portuguese  ports  under  licenses  granted 
by  the  governors  of  Gibraltar  and  Malta.  Vessels  of  the 
Barbary  states  were  allowed  to  go  any^vhere  in  the  Mediter- 
ranean or  Portugal,  if  such  places  were  not  actually  block- 
aded by  the  British  or  their  allies,  without  first  stopping 
at  Gibraltar  or  Malta.^^ 

At  the  same  time,  November  25,  1807,  another  order  de- 
clared that  nothing  in  the  order  of  November  11  should  be 
construed  "to  subject  to  capture  and  confiscation  any  articles 
of  the  produce  and  manufacture  of  the  said  countries  and 
colonies  laden  on  board  British  ships,  which  would  not  have 

16  Ibid.,  pp.  271,  272. 

17  Ibid.,  p.  272. 


30        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

been  subject  to  capture  and  confiscation  if  such  order  had 
not  been  made."^^ 

On  the  same  day,  November  25,  England  declared  that 
ships  and  goods  belonging  to  citizens  of  Lubeck  and  seized 
after  the  order  in  council  of  November  19,  1806,  when 
declared  by  the  admiralty  courts  "to  belong  to  subjects  or 
inhabitants  of  Prussia  or  Lubeck,  and  not  otherwise  liable  to 
confiscation,"  should  be  allowed  to  go  to  a  neutral  port  or 
the  port  to  which  they  belonged.  Moreover,  until  further 
orders,  such  ships  were  not  liable  to  detention  provided  they 
traded  to  and  from  the  ports  of  the  British  kingdom,  between 
neutral  ports,  or  from  ports  of  English  allies  and  proceeded 
at  once  to  the  port  mentioned  in  their  respective  clearance 
papers.^^ 

Likewise  at  the  same  time,  November  25,  the  English  gov- 
ernment ordered  that  all  Portuguese  ships  and  cargoes,  if 
so  pronounced  by  the  English  courts,  "and  not  otherwise 
liable  to  confiscation,"  should  be  restored  and  allowed  to 
proceed  to  Portugal  or  to  any  neutral  port.  Moreover,  Por- 
tuguese goods  and  ships  were  not  to  be  subject  to  capture 
in  the  future  if  they  were  trading  between  British  ports, 
to  and  from  Gibraltar  or  Malta  directly  with  the  port  speci- 
fied in  the  clearance  papers,  between  neutral  ports,  between 
Portugal  and  her  colonies,  or  directly  from  ports  of  English 
allies  to  ports  specified  in  their  clearance  papers,  provided 
those  ports  were  not  then  in  a  state  of  actual  blockade.  The 
order  specifically  stated,  however,  that  Portuguese  ships  were 
not  to  be  considered  as  entitled  by  any  treaty  to  the  pro- 
tection of  goods  which  might  otherwise  be  subject  to  con- 
fiscation.^" 

Under  date  of  January  8,  1808,  George  Canning,  then  prin- 
cipal Secretary  of  State  for  Foreign  Affairs,  wrote  William 
Pinckney,  our  minister  to  England,  that  the  king  had  "judged 
it  expedient  to  establish  the  most  rigorous  blockade  at  the 
entrance  of  the  ports  of  Carthagena,  Cadiz,  and  St.  Lucar, 
and  of  all  the  intermediate  ports  situated  and  lying  between 

18  Ibid.,  p.   273. 

19  Ibid.,  p.   273. 

20  Ibid.,   p.   273. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  31 

the  ports  of  Carthagena  and  St.  Lucar."  He  asked  Pinckney 
to  inform  American  consuls  and  merchants  in  England  that 
the  afore-mentioned  ports  must  be  considered  in  a  state  of 
blockade  and  that  any  vessels  attempting  'to  violate  the 
blockade  would  be  dealt  with  according  to  the  law  of  nations 
and  treaties.  ^^ 

A  lengthy  act  of  Parliament,  March  28,  1808,  in  furtherance 
of  certain  orders  in  council,  made  numerous  provisions  for 
enforcement  and  was  accompanied  by  several  tables  showing 
duties  which  undoubtedly  caused  thousands  of  pounds  to  be 
turned  into  the  British  treasury.-  Possibly  in  order  to  en- 
courage the  violation  of  the  embargo  by  American  vessels, 
instructions  were  given  to  commanders  of  English  war  ves- 
sels and  privateers  not  to  "interrupt  any  neutral  vessel  laden 
with  lumber  and  provisions"  bound  to  the  English  West 
Indies  or  South  America,  no  matter  to  whom  the  property 
belonged  or  what  irregularities  appeared  in  the  clearance 
papers  or  official  documents.  Moreover,  official  endorsement 
was  to  be  accorded  to  the  vessel  and  she  was  to  be  allowed 
to  depart  with  cargo  ''and  to  proceed  to  any  unblockaded 
port,  notwithstanding  the  present  hostilities,  or  any  future 
hostilities  which  may  take  place,"  under  the  protection  of  an 
official.^^ 

On  April  14,  1808,  the  British  Parliament  prohibited  the 
exportation  of  cotton-wool  from  Great  Britain.  The  act  de- 
clared, however,  that  the  king,  by  license  under  his  royal 
sign  manual,  might  authorize  any  person  to  export  cotton- 
wool to  neutral  states  under  terms  specified  in  the  license. 
The  act  did  not  prohibit  the  carrying  of  cotton-wool  in  the 
British  coastwise  trade,  but  careful  precautions  were  taken 
to  make  sure  that  it  was  genuine  coast  trade.  Cotton-wool 
carried  in  violation  of  the  act  was  to  be  confiscated,  every 
offender  was  to  forfeit  forty  shillings  for  every  pound  so 
carried,  and  the  vessel  "with  her  guns,  furniture,  ammuni- 
tion, tackle,  and  apparel"  was  to  be  declared  forfeited.-* 

21  Ibid.,  p.  273.     Pinckney's  name  in  the  official  correspondence  is  spelled  "Pinkney." 

22  Ibid.,  pp.   274-280. 

23  Ibid.,  p.  281. 

24  Ibid.,  p.  281. 


32        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

On  the  same  date,  April  14,  1808,  the  English  Parliament 
passed  an  act  making  valid  various  orders  in  council  and 
treasury  warrants  for  East  India  goods,  Portuguese  wine 
and  other  commodities,  for  the  entrance  and  ware  housing 
of  various  goods  imported  in  neutral  vessels,  the  indemnifica- 
tion of  the  interested  parties,  the  remittance  of  forfeitures  in 
certain  cases  and  allowing  the  king  by  order  in  council  or 
special  license  to  grant  permission  to  any  vessels  whatsoever 
to  carry  goods  from  countries  excluding  the  British  flag  dur- 
ing hostilities  and  for  two  months  after  the  beginning  of  the 
next  meeting  of  Parliament.^^ 

On  May  4,  1808,  Canning  wrote  Pinckney  that  the  king 
had  "judged  it  expedient  to  establish  the  most  vigorous 
blockade"  of  Copenhagen  and  the  other  ports  in  Zealand. 
He  accordingly  asked  Pinckney  to  notify  the  American  con- 
suls and  merchants  then  in  England  that  all  measures  author- 
ized by  international  law  and  existing  treaties  would  be 
invoked  to  enforce  the  law.^* 

Seven  weeks  later,  June  23,  1808,  Parliament  passed  a  law 
authorizing  the  direct  importation  of  the  goods  of  the  United 
States  to  Great  Britain  if  brought  in  British  vessels,  American 
vessels,  or  vessels  captured  as  lawful  prizes  by  the  United 
States  and  acquiesced  to  by  the  British  courts  and  owned, 
captained  and  three-fourths  manned  by  subjects  of  the 
United  States.  If,  however,  the  importation  of  such  goods 
from  foreign  countries  was  prohibited,  they  were  not  included 
under  the  above  terms.  When  included,  moreover,  they  were 
subject  to  duties  and  various  regulations.  If  the  goods  were 
imported  in  ships  other  than  "British  built,  owned,  navigated, 
and  registered,"  they  were  subject  to  duties  paid  on  similar 
articles  imported  from  foreign  countries.  On  reexportation 
certain  drawbacks  were  allowed.^^ 

These  duties  were  well-nigh  prohibitive  even  if  the  United 
States  wanted  to  recognize  her  subordination  to  Great  Britain. 
Thus  a  Baltimore  paper  declared  that  the  English  duty  on  a 
cargo  of  tobacco  amounted  to  $30,000,  on  flour,  $10,000,  and 

25  Ibid.,  p.  282. 

26  Ibid.,  p.  282. 

27  Ibid.,  pp.  283,   284. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  33 

on  fish,  $5,000.^®  The  same  paper  declared,  a  week  or  two 
later:  "Between  the  Tribute  on  our  exports  and  the  duties  on 
our  imports  the  city  of  Baltimore  Avith  its  former  commerce 
would  pay  to  the  king  of  Great  Britain  an  annual  tribute 
of  about  Two  millions  and  a  half  of  dollars  per  annum  .  ."^^ 

A  New  England  paper  declared  that  the  duty  on  one 
thousand  bales  of  cotton  at  three  hundred  pounds  Avould 
amount  to  $50,000  at  nine  pence  a  pound.  At  fourteen  and 
a  half  cents  a  pound  the  cotton  would  bring  $43,700.  "Thus," 
ran  the  comment,  "the  exporter  would  have  to  pay  $6,500 
in  London  more  than  the  Original  Cost  as  a  Duty  for  liberty 
to   proceed   to   the   Continent !  !"^^ 

On  October  14,  1808,  Rear  Admiral  Alexander  Cochrane 
wrote  to  the  various  officers  under  his  command  that  a  strict 
naval  blockade  was  to  be  established  over  the  leeward  side 
of  the  French  Caribbean  islands,  and  directed  them  to  stop 
neutral  vessels  sailing  for  such  ports.  If  they  appeared 
to  be  ignorant  of  the  blockade,  and  had  no  enemy's  property 
on  board,  they  were  to  be  notified  of  the  blockade,  warned 
not  to  enter  the  ports,  and  have  a  notice  to  that  eff'ect  writ- 
ten on  one  or  more  of  the  ship's  papers  and  then  released. 
If,  however,  they  had  been  warned,  or  had  'sailed  from  a 
clearing  port  after  it  was  reasonably  certain  that  public  noti- 
fication of  the  blockade  had  been  made,  they  were  to  be 
seized  and  sent  "into  port  for  legal  adjudication."  If  neutral 
vessels  came  out  of  these  French  Caribbean  ports  laden  with 
colonial  produce,  goods,  or  merchandise  and  apparently  laden 
after  knowledge  of  the  blockade  had  been  received,  they 
also  were  to  be  seized  and  "sent  in  for  legal  adjudication."^^ 

In  the  next  place  it  is,  of  course,  necessary  to  note  the 
action  of  the  other  principal  belligerent,  for  that  action  too 
influenced  the  United  States,  though  to  a  lesser  extent  than 
England's.  From  May  9,  1793  to  April  17,  1808,  inclusive, 
France  issued  eighteen  decrees  affecting  the  United  States. 
Only  those  from  1806  will  be  considered  here.    On  November 


28  Baltimore  Evening  Post,  September  22,   1808. 

29  Ibid.,  October  3,  1808. 

30  Northampton  Republican  Spy,  November  9,  1808. 

31  American  State  Papers,  Glass  I,  Foreign  Relations,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  284. 


34        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

21,   1806,  Napoleon  issued  the  Berlin  Decree,  for  which  he 
gave  the  following  reasons: 

1.  England   does  not   observe   international   law. 

2.  She  regards  as  enemies  all  individuals  belonging  to 
enemy  states,  and  consequently  makes  prisoners  not  only  of 
the  crews  of  war  vessels,  but  the  crews  of  merchant  vessels 
as  well  with  their  super-cargoes. 

3.  She  applies  the  right  of  conquest  to  merchant  vessels, 
products,  and  private  property. 

4.  In  violation  of  the  law  of  nations  she  blockades  un- 
fortified ports  and  harbors. 

5.  She  uses  a  "paper  blockade"  in  many  cases. 

6.  By  this  means  she  hopes  to  destroy  the  commerce  of 
neutral  nations  and  extend  her  own  products  "upon  the  ruin 
of  those  of  the  continent." 

7.  Anyone  favoring  England  in  this  design  becomes  an 
accomplice. 

8.  England  has  profited  by  this  plan ;  other  nations  have 
suffered. 

9.  "That  it  being  right  to  oppose  to  an  enemy  the  same 
arms  she  makes  use  of,  to  combat  as  she  does,  when  all  ideas 
of  justice  and  every  liberal  sentiment  (the  result  of  civili- 
zation among  men)  are  disregarded;  We  have  resolved  to  en- 
force against  England  the  usages  which  she  has  consecrated 
in  her  maritime  code. 

The  present  decree  shall  be  considered  as  the  fundamental 
law  of  the  empire  until  England  has  acknowledged  that  the 
rights  of  war  are  the  same  on  land  as  at  sea;  that  it  cannot 
be  extended  to  any  private  property  whatever,  nor  to  persons 
who  are  not  military,  and  until  the  right  of  blockade  be 
restrained  to  fortified  places,  actually  invested  by  competent 
forces. '  '^^ 

The  decree  then  declared: 

1.  The   British  Islands  are   blockaded. 

2.  Letters  and  packages  addressed  to  England  or  English- 
men or  in  the  English  language  shall  be  seized. 

32  Ibid.,  pp.  289,   290. 


THE  AMEKICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  35 

3.  All  Englishmen  foimd  in  territories  occupied  by  French 
armies  shall  be  made  prisoners  of  war. 

4.  All  property  of  English  subjects  shall  be  declared  law- 
ful prize. 

5.  All  English  merchandise  is  lawful  prize. 

6.  One-half  of  the  proceeds  resulting  from  the  above  con- 
fiscations shall  be  used  to  indemnify  French  merchants  for 
losses  suffered  at  the  hands  of  English  cruisers. 

7.  Vessels  coming  direct  from  England  or  English  ports, 
or  vessels  there  after  the  publication  of  this  decree  shall  be 
denied  entrance  to  French  ports. 

8.  Vessels  attempting  to  avoid  the  clause  by  making  false 
declarations  shall  be  seized,  and,  with  their  cargoes,  confis- 
cated as  if  they  were  English. 

9.  The  tribunal  of  prizes  in  Italy  shall  be  charged  with 
the  settling  of  controversies  under  the  decree  there ;  the 
tribunal  of  prizes  at  Paris  shall  be  charged  with  the  settling 
of  all  other  controversies  arising  under  the  decree. 

10.  The  minister  of  "Exterior  Relations"  shall  be  charged 
with  communicating  the  decree  "to  the  Kings  of  Spain,  of 
Naples,  of  Holland,  of  Etruria,  and  to  our  allies,  whose  sub- 
jects, like  ours,  are  the  victims  of  the  injustice  and  barbarism 
of  the   English   maritime   laws."^^ 

In  reply  to  the  English  orders  in  council  of  November  11, 
1807,  Napoleon  issued  the  Milan  Decree,  December  17.  1807. 
This  decree,  short  like  its  predecessor  and  unlike  many  of 
the  English  orders  in  council  in  this  respect  and  in  its  clarity, 
was  issued  in  the  name  of  Napoleon,  Emperor  of  the  French, 
King  of  Italy,  and  Protector  of  the  Rheinish  Confederation. 
It  premised  as  reasons  for  its  existence: 

(1.)  The  orders  of  November  11,  1807,  which  made  liable 
to  search,  detention,  and  taxation  neutral  ships  and  the  ships 
of  England's  allies  and  friends. 

(2.)  The  consequent  denationalization  of  ships  of  all  na- 
tions by  England. 

(3.)  The  danger  that  acceding  to  this  demand  would  es- 
tablish tyranny  into   principles  and   consecrate  it   by  usage 

33  Ibid.,  p.  290. 


36        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

even  as  the  English  had  ''availed  themselves  of  the  tolerance 
of  g-ovcrnment  to  establish  the  infamous  principle  that  the 
flag  of  a  nation  does  not  cover  goods,  and  to  have  to  their 
right  of  blockade  an  arbitary  extension,  and  which  infringes 
on  the  sovereignty  of  every  state.  "^* 
The   decree  then  declared: 

1.  All  ships  on  voyages  to  England  submitting  to  English 
search,  or  paying  English  taxes  are  declared  to  be  denational- 
ized, deprived  of  protection  of  former  king,  and  English 
property. 

2.  All  ships  thus  denationalized  are  good  and  lawful  prize 
wherever  they  may  be  found. 

3.  The  British  Isles  are  blockaded  by  land  and  sea.  All 
vessels  sailing  to  or  from  England,  her  colonies,  or  countries 
occupied  by  English  troops  are  to  be  considered  lawful  prize. 

4.  "These  measures,  which  are  resorted  to  only  in  just 
retaliation  of  the  barbarous  system  adopted  by  England, 
which  assimilates  its  legislation  to  that  of  Algiers,  shall  cease 
to  have  any  effect  with  respect  to  all  nations  who  shall  have 
the  firmness  to  compel  the  English  government  to  respect  their 
flag.  They  shall  continue  to  be  rigorously  in  force  as  long 
as  that  Government  does  not  return  to  the  principle  of  the 
law  of  nations,  which  regulates  the  relations  of  civilized 
States  in  a  state  of  war.  The  provisions  of  the  present  de- 
cree shall  be  abrogated  and  null,  in  fact,  as  soon  as  the 
English  abide  again  by  the  principles  of  the  law  of  nations 
which  are  also  the  principles  of  justice  and  of  honor.  "^^ 

The  only  authentic  information  of  the  Bayonne  Decree  of 
April  17,  1808,  to  reach  the  Department  of  State  was  con- 
tained in  a  letter  of  General  Armstrong,  our  minister  to 
France,  dated  April  23,  1808,  and  sent  to  the  Secretary  of 
State.  The  direction  to  the  French  custom  house  officials  was 
"to  seize  all  American  vessels  now  in  the  ports  of  France, 
or  which  may  come  into  them  hereafter."  The  explanation 
given  to  Armstrong  was:  "No  vessel  of  the  United  States 
can  now  navigate  the  seas  without  infracting  a  law  of  the 

34  Ibid.,  p.   290. 

35  Ibid.,  pp.  290,  291. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARC40.  1807-1809  37 

said   States,    and   thus   furnishing   a    presumption   that    they 
do  so  on  British  account,  or  in  British  connexion,"^® 

Under  these  conflicting  orders  and  decrees,  hundreds  of 
American  vessels  and  millions  of  dollars  worth  of  American 
property  were  confiscated.  England  and  her  allies  virtually 
said:  ''If  you  don't  do  as  we  say,  we  will  take  your  prop- 
erty." Napoleon  and  his  allies  said:  "If  you  do  as  England 
says,  we  will  take  your  property."  It  was,  apparently,  a 
question  of  the  frying  pan  or  the  fire.  According  to  a  news 
item  of  June  8,  1808,  Great  Britain  had  carried  into  English 
ports  sixty-seven  vessels  valued  at  eight  million  dollars  since 
November   11,   1807." 

A  report  prepared  by  James  Monroe,  Secretary  of  State, 
and  transmitted  to  the  House  of  Representatives.  July  6 
1812,  by  President  Madison,  declared  that  England  captured 
528  vessels  prior  to  the  orders  in  council  of  November  1], 
1807,  and  389  subsequently  thereto,  or  a  total  of  917.  France 
captured  206  vessels  prior  to  the  Berlin  and  Milan  decrees, 
307  vessels  during  the  existence  of  those  decrees,  to  August 
5,  1810,  and  forty-five  after  their  revocation,  or  a  total  of 
558.^^  Though  England  had  control  of  the  sea,  it  will  be  seen 
that  the  French  were  not  absolutely  powerless.  Many  of 
the  captures  made  by  the  French,  however,  were  of  American 
vessels  in  French  ports. 


36  Ibid.,  p.   291. 

37  National  Intelligencer,  June  8,   1808. 

38  American  State  Papers,  Cla^s  I,  Foreign  Relations,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.   583-585. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  EMBARGO  IN  LEGISLATION,  DEBATE,  AND 
DIPLOMACY 

No  self-respecting  nation  could  tamely  submit  to  restric- 
tions imposed  upon  it  by  foreign  powers.  This  was  especially 
difficult  for  the  United  States  in  the  case  of  England,  after 
the  Leopard-Chesapeake  outrage.  On  June  22,  1807,  the 
Leopard,  a  fifty-gun  vessel,  stopped  the  Chesapeake  off  the 
Virginia  coast  just  outside  of  the  three  mile  limit,  and  de- 
manded the  surrender  of  seamen  who  were  said  to  be  de- 
serters from  British  naval  service.  When  the  demand  was 
refused,  the  English  vessel  opened  fire.  The  Chesapeake 
was  unprepared  for  action.  Many  ginis  were  dismounted 
and  the  deck  was  littered  with  stores.  After  twenty-one  men 
had  been  Avounded  or  killed,  one  gun  was  discharged  by  a 
coal  brought  from  the  galley  fire.  The  flag  was  then  hauled 
down.  The  British  carried  off  four  men  said  to  be  deserters. 
Since  the  captain  of  the  Leopard  refused  to  accept  the  sur- 
render of  the  Chesapeake,  the  American  vessel  returned  to 
her  anchorage.  The  public  anger  was  furious.  Barrels  of 
water  intended  for  British  war  vessels  were  smashed,  indig- 
nation resolutions  poured  in,  and  many  people  clamored  for 
war.  Jefferson,  however,  contented  himself  for  the  time  being 
with  a  proclamation  ordering  the  ports  of  the  United  States 
closed  to  British  war  vessels  and  with  negotiations  which 
proved   unsatisfactory.^ 

The  merchants,  most  immediately  involved  in  the  depre- 
dations on  our  trade,  were  inclined  to  favor  a  circunrspeet 
course.  Many  of  them,  then  as  now,  worshipped  the  dollar. 
Losses  came  to  them,  of  course,  but  because  of  the  dangers 
of  the  voyage,  prices  were  high ;  hence  the  successful  traders 
made  exorbitant  profits.  Nevertheless,  the  sentiment  of  the 
country  veered   steadily  towards  obtaining   and  maintaining 


1   Channing,  E.,  History  of  the   TJniled  Slates,  Vol.  IV,   pp.   370-372. 

3S 


THE  xVMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  39 

for  the  United  States  a  position  of  respect  at  home  and 
abroad.  The  question  was:  ''How  can  a  nation  unprepared 
for  war  force  two  mighty  foes,  locked  in  a  life  and  death 
struggle,  to  repeal  their  obnoxious  orders  and  decrees?" 
Among  the  expedients  considered  for  the  protection  of  our 
commerce  were: 

1.  Use  of  ships  of  Avar; 

2.  Arming  of  merchant  vessels; 

3.  An  offensive  and  defensive  war; 

4.  A  general  suspension  of  foreign  commerce;  and 

5.  An  embargo  of  vessels,  sailors,  and  merchandise.^ 
Jefferson,  pacific  by  nature  and  fearful  of  the  cost  of  war, 

favored  the  last  named  measure.  H«  was  not  alone  in  this 
opinion,  for  all  his  cabinet  sided  in  with  him.  Albert  Galla- 
tin, the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  however,  was  apparently 
not  so  enthusiastic  as  his  chief  might  wish,  for  on  December 
18,  1807,  he  wrote  to  Jefferson  as  follows:     ■" 

...  I  also  think  that  an  embargo  for  a  limited  time  will  at  this 
moment  be  preferable  in  itself,  and  less  objectionable  in  Congress.  In 
every^point  of  view,  privations,  suiferings,  revenue,  effect  on  the  enemy, 
politics  at  home,  etc.,  I  prefer  war  to  a  permanent  embargo.  Govern- 
mental prohibitions  do  always  more  mischief  than  had  been  calculated ; 
and  it  is  not  without  much  hesitation  that  a  statesman  should  hazard 
to  regulate  the  concerns  of  individuals  as  if  he  could  do  it  better  than 
themselves.3 

On  the  same  day  that  Gallatin's  letter  was  written,  the 
president  sent  the  following  communication  to  the  Senate 
and  the  House   of  Representatives : 

The  communications  now  made,  showing  the  great  and  increasing 
dangers  with  which  our  vessels,  our  seamen,  and  merchandise  are 
threatened  on  the  high  seas  and  elsewhere  from  the  belligerent  powers 
of  Europe,  and  it  being  of  the  greatest  importance  to  keep  in  safety 
these  essential  resources,  I  deem  it  my  duty  to  recommend  the  subject 
to  the  consideration  of  Congress,  who  will  doubtless  perceive  all  the 
advantages  which  may  be  expected  from  an  inhibition  of  the  departure 
of  our  vessels  from  the  ports  of  the  United  States. 

Their  wisdom  will  also  see  the  necessity  of  making  every  preparation 
for  whatever  events  may  grow  out  of  the  present  crisis.* 


-'  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.   17,  p.  366. 

3  Adams,  Henry,  Life  of  Albert  Gallatin,  pp.  366,  367. 

4  Richardson,   J.   D.,   A   Compilation   of   the  Messages  and  Papers  of   the   Presidents, 
17S01707,  Vol.   I,  p.  433. 


40        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

This  message  was  accompanied  by  documents  from  France 
and  England  showing  the  necessity  of  affording  protection 
to  our  commerce.^  The  communication  was  read  the  same 
day  in  the  Senate  and  referred  to  a  committee  which  re- 
ported a  bill  almost  immediately.  The  Senate  passed  the 
measure  by  a  vote  of  22  to  6  and  sent  it  to  the  House  within 
five  hours  after  the  first  reading.  In  the  Senate,  it  is  true, 
some  members  had  urged  delay,  but  others  had  rejoiced  over 
the  sign  of  vigor  on  the  part  of  the  president  and  had  ap- 
pealed for  instant  decision.  Among  these  was  John  Quincy 
Adams,  who  had  declared:  "The  President  has  recommended 
the  measure  on  his  high  responsibility.  I  would  not  con- 
sider, I  would  not  deliberate;  I  would  act!"®  In  the  mean- 
time, the  House  also  acted.  When  the  communication  from 
the  president  arrived,  John  Randolph  took  the  lead,  and 
J  moved  that  an  embargo  be  laid  immediately.  When  the 
Senate  bill  came,  it  was  substituted  for  the  Randolph  reso- 
lution. On  the  next  day  the  "erstwhile  leader  of  the  Re- 
publicans" opposed  the  embargo  by  insisting  that  it  was 
truckling  to  French  orders.  The  Federalists  seized  upon 
these  charges,  but  in  spite  of  divided  councils  caused  by 
Randolph's  defection,  the  embargo  was  passed  December  21, 
1807,  by  a  vote  of  82  to  44.^  In  all  probability,  Jefferson 
never  scored  a  higher  triumph  throughout  the  whole  of  his 
political  career.     Henry  Adams  has  well  written: 

On  his  mere  recommendation,  without  warning,  discussion,  or  pub- 
licity, and  in  silence  as  to  his  true  reasons  and  motives,  he  succeeded 
in  fixing  upon  the  country,  beyond  recall,  the  experiment  of  peaceable 
coercion.  His  triumph  was  almost  a  marvel;  but  no  one  could  fail  to 
see  its  risks.  A  free  people  required  to  know  in  advance  the  motives 
which  actuated  government,  and  the  intended  consequences  of  important 
laws.  Large  masses  of  intelligent  men  were  slow  to  forgive  what  they 
might  call  deception.     If  Jefferson's  permanent  embargo  should  fail  to 


5  American  Stale  Papers,  Series  I,  Foreign  Relations,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  25,  26.  Jeffer- 
son's annual  message  of  October  27,  1807,  had  previously  pointed  out  the  dangers  to 
American  commerce,  especially  from  the  English  orders.  He  had,  with  some  ex- 
aggeration, declared:  "Under  this  new  law  of  the  ocean  our  trade  on  the  Mediter- 
ranean has  been  swept  away  by  seizures  and  condemnations,  and  that  in  other  seas 
is  threatened  with  the  same  fate."      (Richardson,  J.  D.,  op.  cit.,  p.  427.) 

6  Quoted  from  J.  Q.  Adams,  Diary,  Vol.  I,  p.  491,  in  Channlng,  E.,  The  Jeffersonian 
System,  p.   212.     See   also  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.    17,   p.    51. 

V  Channing,  E.,  Jeffersonian  System,  pp.  212,  213. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  41 

coerce  Europe,  what  would  the  people  of  America  think  of  the  process 
by  which  it  had  been  fastened  upon  them?  What  would  be  said  and 
believed  of  the  President  who  had  challenged  so  vast  a  responsibility ?« 

-  The  act  which  Jefferson  approved  December  22,  1807,  pro- 
hibited the  sailing  of  all  ships  and  vessels  subject  to  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  United  States,  if  destined  to  some  foreign 
port  or  place.  No  vessel,  unless  licensed  under  the  immediate 
direction  of  the  president,  was  to  be  given  a  clearance.  The 
chief  executive  was  to  give  the  proper  instructions  to  the 
revenue  and  naval  authorities.  The  act  specifically  declared 
that  no  provision  of  the  law  was  to  be  so  construed  as  to 
detain  any  foreign  vessel  in  ballast,  or  loaded  ''with  goods, 
wares,  and  merchandise"  when  notified.  Coastwise  trade 
was  permitted  when  the  master,  owner,  consignee,  or  factor 
of  the  vessel  gave  bond,  with  at  least  one  surety,  to  double 
the  value  of  the  vessel  and  cargo  that  the  goods  would  be 
relanded  in  a  port  of  the  United  States,  ''dangers  of  the  sea 
excepted.''  The  collector  of  the  district  from  which  the 
vessel  sailed  was  later  on  to  send  the  bond,  with  a  certifi- 
cate from  the  collector  where  the  goods  had  been  relanded, 
to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  Armed  vessels  with  public 
commissions  from  foreign  nations  were  declared  exempt  from 
the  embargo. ° 

Enemies  of  Jefferson  have  never  ceased  to  condemn  his 
haste  and  motives  in  forcing  the  passage  of  the  embargo  act. 
William  Sullivan  declared : 

The  Berlin  decree,  then  more  than  a  year  old;  the  inquiry  of  Air. 
Armstrong,  and  the  answer  to  it;  and  the  proclamation  of  the  British 
government,  (cut  from  a  newspaper)  recalling  the  British  seamen,  and 
prohibiting  them  from  serving  foreign  princes,  and  states,  dated  October 
16,  1807,  were  all  the  documents  sent  to  Congress,  proposing  an  unlimited 
embargo.  These  showed  the  great  and  unceasing  dangers  with  which 
our  vessels,  our  seamen,  and  merchandise  were  threatened  on  the  high 
seas,  and  elsewhere  by  the  belligerent  powers  of  Europe.io 

In  the  same  letter  Sullivan  added:  "No  one  who  calmly 
considers  this  transaction  can  doubt,  that  it  was  conceived 
and  executed  for  the  purpose,  and  only  purpose  of  enforcing. 


8  Adams,  Henry,   Ilisfory   of  the    Vnited  States,   Vol.   IV,   pp.   176,    177. 

9  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.  18,  pp.  2814,  2815. 

10  Familiar  Letters  on  Public  Characters  and  Events,  (October  15,  1833),  p.  259. 


42        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

so  far  as  this  country  could  be  useful  to  that  end,  the  con- 
tinental system  of  Napoleon.  "^^  On  October  25,  1833  he 
wrote:  "He  [Jefferson]  was  willing  to  impose  an  annual 
loss  of  fifty  millions  on  his  own  countrymen,  and  enforce  his 
system  of  restriction  at  the  point  of  the  bayonet,  to  aid 
Napoleon   in   humbling   England.  "^^ 

Jefferson's  real  motive  in  recommending  the  embargo  may 
never  be  known.  A  friendly  view  will,  of  course,  note  the 
expected  advantages  of  the  measure.     Thus  we  read: 

y  An  embargo  will  not  be  without  advantages  separate  from  the  imme- 
diate purpose  it  is  to  answer.  It  forces  frugality  in  the  use  of  things 
depending  on  habit  alone  for  the  gratification  they  yield.  It  fosters 
applications  of  labor  which  contributes  to  our  internal  sufficiency  for 
our  wants.  It  will  extend  those  household  manufactures,  which  are 
particularly  adapted  to  the  present  stage  of  our  society.  And  it  favors 
the  introduction  of  particular  branches  of  others,  highly  important  in 
their  nature,  which  will  proceed  of  themselves  when  once  put  into  motion, 
and  moreover  by  attracting  from  abroad  hands  suitable  for  the  service, 
will  take  the  fewer  from  the  cultivation  of  our  soil.is 

Two  months  later  the  same  paper  advanced  eight  reasons 
for  the  passage  of  the  embargo,  in  substance  as  follows: 

1.  No  commerce  could  be  carried  on  with  safety  prior  to 
the  embargo. 

2.  We  had  serious  disputes  with  England  which  might  lead 
to  war. 

3.  The  embargo  would  bring  the  British  to  terms. 

4.  It  would  tend  to  preserve  peace. 

5.  It  would  prevent  the  importation  of  many  millions  of 
undesirable   foreign  goods. 

6.  It   would  injure  enemies  more  effectively  than  war. 

7.  It  would  encourage  domestic  manufactures. 

8.  It  would  discourage  ''extravagance  and  expense  in  for- 
eign gewgaws."" 

Later  on,  when  the  effects  of  the  embargo  became  apparent,, 
the  same  paper  quoted  the  Washington  Monitor  with  approval 
on  the  cost  of  embargo  as  compared  with  war.    Thus  we  read: 


11  Ibid.,  p.  260. 

12  Ibid.,  p.  268. 

13  Northampton  Republican  Spy,  Januarj'  13,  1808. 

14  Ibid.,  March  9,  1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  43 

THE  EMBARGO 
'  Will  produce  temporary  inconvenience;  the  loss  of  a  few  thousand 
dollars;  and  give  a  little  more  idle  time  to  the  citizens,  who  do  not 
choose  to  turn  their  attention  to  internal  improvements.  It  will  not 
starve  anybody.  On  the  contrary,  the  staple  necessaries  of  life  will  be 
cheaper. 

A  WAR 

Will  produce  the  loss  of  millions  of  dollars,  burning  and  sacking  of 
towns  and  cities,  rape,  theft,  murders,  streams  of  blood,  weeping  widows, 
helpless  orphans,  the  beggary  of  thousands,  the  ruin  of  agriculture,  and 
an  extensive  depravation  of  morals. 

Citizens  of  the  United  States!     Which  do  you  choose  ?i5 

-  Southern  administration  newspapers  accepted  the  same  view. 
In  the  fall  a  Virginia  paper  declared  that  the  embargo  was 
simply  a  choice  of  evils — war,  submission,  or  embargo — and 
that  the  government  had  chosen  the  least  damaging.^^ 

An  editorial  early  in  December  admitted  that  the  embargo 
was  a  great  evil  to  the  commercial  and  agricultural  interests, 
but  contended,  that  no  lesser  evil  could  be  adopted  in  its  place. 
The  embargo,  moreover,  prevented  war,  the  article  insisted.^^ 

Anti-administration  newspapers  claimed  that  Jefferson  laid 
the  embargo  because  of  French  influence.  In  a  Hartford  paper 
early  in  January,  1808,  we  read: 

What  is  this  Embargo  laid  on  for?  is  in  every  body's  mouth.  As  it 
is  the  policy  of  our  present  rulers  to  let  the  people  grope  in  the  dark, 
we  can  only  conjecture.  From  the  variety  of  considerations,  we  feel 
persuaded  that  our  excellent  friend  Bonaparte  has  intimated,  to  our 
government,  his  intention  to  take  measures,  as  it  respects  our  commerce, 
which  our  administration  ought  to  resent  and  which  the  people  would 
resent,  if  they  knew  them ;  there  is  then  but  one  way  to  manage  us — that 
is — restrain  commerce,  and  then  the  intentions  of  Bonaparte  cannot  be 
brought  into  operation,  and  may  be  kept  a  secret  from  the  American 
publick.  The  long  and  short  of  it  is  this — rather  than  resist  any  over- 
bearing and  insulting  measure  of  France,  we  are  to  be  ruined,  by  com- 
mercial restriction. IS 

The  charge  of  French  influence  was  continually  made.  A 
few  typical  instances  occurring  from  August  to  September  will 
be  cited.     Thus  a  North  American  charge  that  both  Jefferson 


15  Ibid.,  July  20,  1808. 

16  Richmond  Enquirer,  September  16,   1808. 

17  Ibid.,  December  2,   1808. 

18  Connecticut  Courant,  January  6,  1808. 


44        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

and  Madison  were  naturalized  French  citizens  was  widely  cir- 
culated." Madison  was  charged  with  declaring:  "France  wants 
money  and  we  must  give  it. ' '  Jefferson  is  said  in  an  irritated  man- 
ner to  have  expressed  the  idea  that  the  United  States  Avould  fight 
England.  His  visitor,  a  merchant,  asked  how  we  could  reach 
the  English  when  we  had  no  ships  and  they  would  not  come 
here.     He  replied:  "France  has  ships  and  we  have  men."^^ 

Under  the  form  of  question  and  answer  the  Brattleborough 
Reporter  asked:  "Why  is  the  Embargo  like  good  strong 
coffee?"  It  replied:  "Because  Bonaparte  is  remarkably  fond 
of  it."  Again:  "Why  is  the  Embargo  like  French  influence 
in  our  cabinet"?"  "Because  unless  speedily  removed,"  was 
the  answer,  "it  will  be  the  ruin  of  America. "^^ 

A  paper  of  the  same  date  charged  Jefferson  and  Madison 
with  violating  the  first  article  of  the  ninth  section  of  the 
Constitution  by  accepting  secretly  "the  title  of  member  of 
Bonaparte's  Legion  of  Honour. "^^  A  little  later  the  same 
paper  charged  Jefferson  with  laying  the  embargo  at  Napoleon's 
express  order.^^ 

In  connection  with  this  charge  of  French  influence  we  have 
numerous  statements  to  the  effect  that  the  embargo  was  violated 
by  French  vessels  with  the  consent  of  the  administration.  One 
article  read: 

Nothwithstanding  the  Embargo  Laivs,  (to  which  it  seems  Mr.  Jefferson 
and  his  friends  pay  no  regard)  French  vessels  are  continually  carrying 
off  supplies  to  Guadaloupe,  etc.  The  French  brig  La  Pars  has  just 
sailed  from  Philadelphia;  among  the  articles  she  took  by  Jefferson's 
orders,  were  five  tons  cordage,  150  bbls.  flour,  100  do.  salt  provisions, 
six  pipes  wine,  a  number  pipes  brandy,  and  many  articles  which  the 
people  must  not  know  of,  because  they  are  not  allowed  such  privileges. 2* 

The  president  and  Congress  were  continually  charged  with 
hostility  to  trade.     "Perish  Commerce  is  the  motto  of  the  ma- 


19  National  Intelligencer,  August   24,   1808. 

20  United  States  Gazette,  August  31,   1808. 

21  Massachusetts  Spy  or  Worcester  Gazette,   September  21,   1808. 

22  Vnited  States  Gazette,  September  21,   1808. 

23  Ibid.,   October   8,   1808. 

24  Massachusetts  Spy  or  Worcester  Gazette,  August  24,  1808.     See  also  the  National 
Intelligencer,  July  1,   1808  and  the  New  York  Herald,  December  31,   1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  45 

jority  of  Congress,"  declared  a  leading  Massachusetts  paper.^^ 
A  prominent  individual  in  discussing  the  embargo  evils  with 
a  member  of  Congress  declared  that  it  had  already  reduced 
thousands  of  seamen  to  beggary  and  that  many  thousands  had 
already  gone  out  of  the  country  into  British  employ.  The 
answer,  declared  to  be  representative  of  Southern  opinion,  was : 
"As  to  their  beggary  it  is  their  own  fault;  there  is  land 
enough;  let  them  take  to  the  spade.     As  to  their  going  out 

of  the  country,  I  am  d d  glad  of  it.     And  I  hope  they 

will  never  come  back  to  it  again.  If  we  had  no  seamen,  we 
should  have  no  commerce — and  if  we  had  no  commerce,  we 
should  not  be  getting  into  eternal  quarrels  with  foreign  na- 
tions !!"28 

Jefferson  has  often  been  accused,  as  these  citations  indicate, 
of  aiming  at  the  destruction  of  commerce  and  there  is  ground 
for  this  in  his  writings."  Again,  he  liked  to  experiment  on 
a  large  scale  and,  perhaps,  as  some  people  stated,  wanted  to 
try  out  a  pet  theory.  The  charitable  view,  however,  is  that 
he  sincerely  attempted  to  preserve  the  peace  and  protect  Am- 
erican shipping,  seamen,  and  products  from  foreign  depreda- 
tions. 

On  December  23,  1807,  Madison,  Secretary  of  State,  wrote 
to  Pinckney,  concerning  the  embargo : 

But  it  may  be  proper  to  authorize  you  to  assure  tlie  British.  Goveru- 
ment,  as  has  been  just  expressed  to  the  minister  here,  that  the  act  is 
a  measure  of  precaution  only,  called  for  by  the  occasion;  that  it  is  to 
be  considered  as  neither  hostile  in  its  character,  nor  as  justifying,  or 
inviting,  or  leading  to  hostility  with  any  nation  whatever,  and  particular- 
ly as  opposing  no  obstacle  whatever  to  amicable  negotiations  and  sat- 
isfactory adjustments  with  Great  Britain,  on  the  subjects  of  difference 
between  the  two  countries. 2s 

The  embargo  made  necessary  several  supplemental  acts.  One 
of  these  was  approved  by  the  president,  January  8,  1808. 
There  were  seven  sections  to  this  act,  whereas  there  had  only 
been  two  in  the  original  act.  It  was  provided  that,  during 
the  continuance  of  the  embargo,   "no  vessel  licensed  for  the 


25  Boston  Reperetory,  March  22,  1808. 

26  Boston  Reperetory,  April  1,  1808. 

27  Writings,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  269;  Vol.  IX,  p.  245. 

28  American  State  Papers,  Class  I,  Foreign  Relations,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  206. 


46        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

coasting  trade"  should  be  allowed  a  clearance  unless  the 
owner,  consignee,  agent  or  factor,  with  the  master,  gave  bond, 
with!  at  least  one  surety  to  the  United  States,  to  an  amount 
double  the  worth  of  ship  and  cargo,  that  the  vessel  would  not 
go  to  a  foreign  place,  but  would  reland  the  cargo  in  some  port 
of  the  United  States.  Owners  of  licensed  fishing  vessels  and 
those  bound  on  whaling  voyages,  according  to  the  second  sec- 
tion, if  they  had  on  board  no  other  cargo  than  sea  stores,  salt, 
and  the  ordinary  fishing  tackle,  had  to  give  a  general  bond  to 
four  times  the  value  of  vessel  and  cargo,  that  they  would  not, 
while  the  embargo  was  in  operation,  go  to  any  foreign  port, 
but  would  return  to  the  United  States  with  their  fishing  fare. 
If  the  vessels  were  uniformly  employed  in  places  within  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  United  States,  a  bond  equal  to  three  hundred 
dollars  ;for  each  ton  of  the  vessel  so  engaged  was  sufficient, 
provided  the  vessel  was  not  employed  in  foreign  trade  during 
the  time  specified  in  the  bond. 

Vessels  leaving  during  the  continuance  of  the  embargo  with- 
out clearance  or  permit  or  contrary  to  the  provisions  of  the 
embargo  acts  and  proceeding  to  foreign  ports  and  there  en- 
gaging in  trade  were  to  be  forfeited  together  with  their  car- 
goes. If,  however,  they  were  not  seized,  the  owners,  agents, 
freighters  or  factors  of  the  vessels,  should,  for  each  offense, 
be  fined  a  sum  equal  to  double  the  value  of  ship  and  cargo, 
and  should  thereafter  be  deprived  of  credit  for  duties  on  their 
imports  into  the  United  States.  The  commanders  of  such  ves- 
sels, with  all  other  persons  knowingly  concernea  in  such  pro- 
hibited 'foreign  voyages  were  to  be  fined  a  sum  ranging  from 
one  thousand  to  twenty  thousand  dollars  for  each  offense, 
whether  or  not  the  vessels  were  seized  and  condemned.  More- 
over, the  oath  of  any  commander  so  offending  was  thereafter 
declared  inadmissible  before  any  United  States  customs  col- 
lector. The  exception  made  in  the  former  act  in  favor  of  foreign 
ships  and  vessels  was  dealt  with.  It  declared  that  such  ex- 
ception should  apply  only  to  public  armed  vessels  possessed 
of  public  commissions  from  foreign  nations.  Privateers,  ves- 
sels with  letters  of  marque,  and  other  private  armed  vessels 
were  consequently  ruled  out;  they,  however,  were  allowed  to 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  47 

depart  subject  to  the  same  regulations  as  prevailed  for  other 
private  foreign  ships  and  vessels. 

The  next  section  declared  that  if  any  foreign  vessel  during 
the  continuance  of  the  embargo  took  on  board  specie  or  prod- 
ucts "other  than  the  provisions  and  sea  stores  necessary  for 
the  voyage,"  the  vessel  together  with  all  its  cargo  should  be 
entirely  forfeited,  and  could  be  seized  and  condemned  in  any 
competent  United  States  court.  Every  person  interested  in 
the  violation  could  be  fined  "a  sum  not  exceeding  twenty 
thousand  dollars,  nor  less  than  one  thousand  dollars,  for  every 
such  offense,"  The  last  section  provided  that  the  time  during 
which  the  embargo  was  in  force  should  not  be  counted  ''as 
making  part  of  the  term  of  twelve  calendar  months  during 
which  goods,  wares,  or  merchandise,  imported  into  the  United 
States,  must  be  re-exported  in  order  to  be  entitled  to  a  draw- 
back of  the  duties  paid  on  the  importation  thereof."-® 

When  Jefferson  recommended  the  embargo  act,  he  had  not 
yet  received  official  news  of  the  British  orders  in  council  of 
November  11,  1807.  British  papers  received,  it  is  true,  had 
hinted  at  far-reaching  orders,  but  there  is  little  definite  proof 
that  these  influenced  him.  Apparently  they  had  as  little  effect 
in  the  Congressional  debates.  On  Febmary  4,  1808,  however, 
Jefferson  sent  the  orders  to  Congress  with  the  following  brief 
message : 

Having  received  an  official  communication  of  certain  orders  of  the 
British  Government  against  the  maritime  rights  of  neutrals,  bearing 
date  the  11th  of  November,  1807,  I  transmit  them  to  Congress  as  a  fur- 
ther proof  of  the  increasing  dangers  to  our  navigation  and  commerce 
which  led  to  the  provident  measure  of  the  act  of  the  present  session 
laying  an  embargo  on  our  own  vessels. ^o 

The  embargo  act  and  the  first  supplementary  act  failed  to 
stop  all  commerce.  The  embargo  act  itself  did  not  touch  the 
trade  with  Canada  and  Florida.  The  first  supplemental  act 
applied  merely  to  fishing  and  coasting  vessels.  The  govern- 
ment now  determined  by  a  second  supplemental  act  to  stop 
all  land  and  sea  commerce  with  foreign  powers.  Accordingly. 
on  February  11,  1808,  the  committee  on  commerce  and  manu- 


29  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.  18,  pp.  2815-2818. 

30  American  State  Papers,  Class  I,  Foreign  Relations,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  29. 


48        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

factures  was  instructed  to  determine  what  further  restrictions 
were  necessary  to  prevent  exportations  to  foreign  countries, 
with  the  option  of  reporting  by  bill  or  otherwise.^^  On  Feb- 
ruary 19,  1808,  various  supplementary  acts  to  the  embargo 
were  brought  up.  These  created  hot  words,  particularly  the 
fourth,  which  forbade  the  "exportation  in  any  manner  what- 
ever of  goods  the  exportation  of  which  by  sea  is  prohibited 
by  the  embargo  laws.  "^-  In  spite  of  heated  discussions,  how- 
ever, Jefferson's  control  seemed  well-nigh  absolute.  On  Febru- 
ary 29,  1808,  the  second  supplemental  bill  passed  the  House 
by  a  vote  of  97  to  22.^^  In  the  Senate,  little  opposition, 
apparently,  was  recorded.^*  On  March  12,  the  president  signed 
the  measure  and  H  became  law."^ 

This  act  declared  that  "no  ship,  vessel,  or  boat  of  any 
description  whatever,  owned  by  citizens  of  the  United  States, 
and  *which  is  neither  registered,  licensed,  nor  possessed  of  a 
sea  letter,  shall  be  allowed  to  depart  from  any  port  of  the 
United  States,  or  shall  receive  a  clearance.  "^^  If  the  vessels 
desired  to  engage  in  the  coastwise  trade,  the  owners,  factors 
or  consignees,  if  the  vessels  were  American  owned,  had,  with 
the  usual  surety,  to  give  a  bond  double  the  value  of  vessel  and 
cargo  that  the  goods  would  be  landed  in  some  port  of  the 
United  States.  If  the  vessels  were  foreign  owned,  the  bond 
amounted  to  four  times  the  value  of  the  vessel  and  cargo. 
If,  however,  the  American  vessels  had  been  uniformly  employed 
in  waters  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  United  States,  a  bond 
equal  to  two  hundred  dollars  for  each  ton  of  the  vessel  was 
sufficient,  provided  the  vessel  was  not  employed  in  any  foreign 
trade  during  the  time  specified  in  the  bond. 

A  bond  was  not  "required  of  boats  not  masted,  or,  if  masted, 
not  being  idecked"  if  their  employment  had  been  and  con- 
tinued to  be  "confined  to  rivers,  bays,  and  sounds,  within  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  United  States,   and  lying  within  districts 


31  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.  18,  p.   1599. 

32  Ibid.,  Vol.   18,  p.   1650. 

33  Jbid.,  Vol.  18,  p.  1712. 

34  Ibid.,  Vol.  17,  p.   158. 

35  Ibid.,  Vol.   18,  p.  2842. 

36  Ibid.,  Vol.    18,   pp.   2839,    2840. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  49 

which  are  not  adjacent  to  the  territories,  colonies,  or  provinces 
of  a  foreign  nation."  The  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  never- 
theless, if  he  saw  fit,  might  ask  a  bond  "equal  to  thirty 
dollars  for  each  ton  of  said  boat,  with  condition  that  such 
boat  shall  not  be  employed  in  any  foreign  trade  during  the 
continuance  of  the  embargo." 

In  every  case  where  a  bond  had  been  required,  the  parties 
to  the  bond,  should,  within  four  months  after  the  bond  had 
been  given,  show  to  the  collector  of  the  port  from  which  the 
vessel  had  sailed  a  certificate  of  relanding  from  the  collector 
of  the  port  specified  in  the  clearance  papers.  On  failure  to 
comply  with  this  provision,  suit  was  to  be  instituted  and 
judgment  given  against  the  defendant  or  defendants  unless 
they  could  produce  proof  of  relanding,  loss  by  sea,  or  some 
unavoidable  accident. 

Another  section  struck  hard  at  the  trade  with  Canada  and 
Florida  even  though  it  had  been  carried  on  by  land.  It  was 
declared  unlawful  to  export  "in  any  manner  whatever"  any 
goods  whose  exportation  was  prohibited  by  the  earlier  embargo 
acts.  In  case  any  goods  w^ere  so  exported,  "either  by  land  or 
water,  the  vessel,  boat,  raft,  cart,  wagon,  sleigh,  or  other  car- 
riage" in  which  they  Avere  exported  "together  with  the  tackle, 
apparel,  horses,  mules,  and  oxen"  were  declared  forfeited. 
Moreover,  the  owners  and  all  persons  concerned  in  such  unlaw- 
ful exportation  were  subject  to  a  fine  not  exceeding  ten  thous- 
and dollars  for  each  offense.  The  careful  effort  to  avoid  un- 
necessary offense  to  foreign  powers  is  apparent  in  the  excej)- 
tions  stated  in  the  section.  In  the  first  place,  foreign  vessels 
were  allowed  to  sail  with  the  cargoes  they  had  on  board  when 
notified  of  the  act.  In  the  second  place,  they  could  furnish 
themselves  with  the  needed  "provisions  and  sea  stores  for  the 
voyage."  Fishing  vessels  might  do  likewise,  and  take  "their 
usual  fishing  tackle  and  apparel."  It  was  specifically  stated 
also  that  nothing  in  this  act  was  to  be  so  construed  as  to 
deprive  the  president  of  power  given  under  the  former  ad. 

One  provision  of  the  law  was  intended  to  prohibit  under 
penalty  the  sale  of  fish  to  any  passing  vessel.  An  exception 
might  be  made,  however,  in  the  case  of  small  vessels  engaged 
in  fishing  on  our  own  coasts. 


50        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

The  last  section  authorized  the  president  to  allow  owners 
who  held  property  acquired  in  ports  outside  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  United  States  prior  to  December  22,  1807,  to  send  a 
vessel  in  ballast  for  that  property  and  bring  it  back  into  the 
United  States.  In  such  cases  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
was  empowered  to  require,  with  "sufficient  security,"  a  bond 
of  any  sum  which  he  deemed  necessary.^^ 

Before  Congress  adjourned  in  the  late  spring  a  law  was 
passed  relating  to  the  suspension  of  the  embargo  and  approved 
April  22,  1808.  This  act  provided  that  in  case  of  peace  in 
Europe  or  the  revocation  of  the  offending  orders  or  decrees, 
in  a  way  which  he  considered  safe  for  American  commerce, 
the  president  might  suspend  in  whole  or  in  part  the  operation 
of  the  embargo  laws,  undei  "such  exceptions  and  restrictions, 
and  on  such  bond  and  security  being  given  as  the  public  in- 
terest and  circumstances"  of  the  case  might  require.  Such 
suspension,  however,  was  not  to  extend  more  than  twenty 
days  after  the  next  meeting  of  Congress.^^  Jefferson  did  not 
seek  this  power;  in  fact  he  was  reported  unwilling  to  assume 
it.^^  He  probably  feared  the  inconveniences  which  are  indicat- 
ed in  a  later  chapter.  In  spite  of  his  reputed  dislike  of  the 
bill,   however,  he  signed  it. 

On  April  25,  1808,  the  most  stringent  and  longest  embargo 
act  yet  passed  was  approved  by  the  president.  The  act  con- 
sisted of  fifteen  sections.  The  first  section  declared  that  no 
vessel  of  any  kind  employed  in  Avaters  within  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  United  States,  save  only  "packets,  ferry-boats,  and 
vessels  exempted  from  the  obligation  of  giving  any  bond  what- 
ever," could  depart  from  any  point  in  the  United  States  with- 
out a  clearance  and  a  manifest  of  the  entire  cargo  on  board 
delivered  by  the  master  or  commander  to  the  collector  or  sur- 
veyor of  the  port  from  which  the  ship  sailed.  Two  months 
later,  the  owners,  agents  or  masters  had  to  return  to  the  col- 
lector of  the  port  from  which  the  vessel  had  sailed  a 
certificate  signed  by  the  collector  of  the  United  States  port  in 
which  the  goods  had  been  landed. 


37  Ibid.,   pp.   2839-2842. 

38  Ibid.,   pp.    2859-2860. 

39  Relfs  Piladelphia  Gazette,  and  Daily  Advertiser,  April  11,  1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  51 

The  next  section  declared  that  no  ships  other  than  those 
described  in  the  preceding  section  should  receive  a  clearing 
unless  the  lading  was  made  thereafter  under  the  surveillance 
of  the  duly  empowered  revenue  offibers  and  subject  to  all  the 
restrictions,  regulations,  penalties,  and  forfeitures  provided 
upon  dutied  imports  into  the  United  States.  This  provision, 
however,  did  not  apply  to  vessels  loaded  or  partially  loaded 
prior  to  the  receipt  of  the  act  by  the  various  collectors. 
The  third  section  declared  that  violations  of  the  law  described 
in  the  first  section  would  cause  the  forfeiture  of  vessel  and 
cargo,  and  subject  the  ''owner  or  owners,  consignee,  agent, 
factors,  freighters,  master  or  skipper  of  such  vessel,"  each  to 
a  fine  ranging  from  one  thousand  to  five  thousand  dollars. 
This  section  closed :  ' '  Provided  always,  that  nothing  herein 
contained  shall  be  construed  to  bar  or  prevent  the  recovery 
of  the  penalty  on  the  bond  given  for  such  vessel." 

The  next  two  sections  for  the  first  time  in  the  embargo  laws 
specifically  referred  to  the  Mississippi  River  trade.  They  pro- 
vided that  during  the  continuance  of  the  embargo  laws,  every 
master  or  person  in  charge  of  "any  vessel,  flat,  or  boat,  in- 
tended to  enter  that  part  of  the  Mississippi"  between  the 
southern  boundary  of  the  Mississippi  Territory  and  the  river 
Iberville,"  should,  if  going  down  stream,  stop  at  Fort  Adams, 
and,  if  going  upstream,  stop  at  Iberville  and  turn  over  to  the 
revenue  officer  there  stationed  a  manifest  of  the  entire  cargo. 
To  the  same  officer,  two  months  later,  if  going  do^vn  stream 
and  by  six  months  later  if  going  up  stream,  a  certificate  that 
the  cargo  had  been  landed  "in  some  part  of  the  district  of 
Mississippi,  and  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  United  States," 
had  to  be  returned.  This  certificate  was  to  be  signed  by  the 
collector  or  one  of  the  surveyors  of  the  district,  or  if  the  cargo 
was  landed  over  thirty  miles  from  the  home  of  one  of  these 
officers,  by  the  state  or  territorial  judge  who  had  jurisdiction 
at  the  place  where  the  goods  were  landed.  Penalties  for  vio- 
lation of  these  conditions  were  fixed  at  one  thousand  to  five 
thousand  dollars  fine  on  each  owner,  consignee,  agent,  factor, 
freighter,  master,  or  skipper,  and  the  forfeiture  of  vessel  and 
cargo. 

The   sixth   section  tried  to  stop   trade   with   foreign  powers 


52        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

whose  territory  bordered  on  our  own  by  forbidding  any  vessel 
to  sail  for  any  district  or  port  adjoining  territories  belonging 
to  foreign  nations.  No  clearance  could  be  issued  unless  special 
permission  had  been  obtained  from  the  president  of  the  United 
States.  Violations  were  punished  by  the  forfeiture  of  vessel 
and  cargo.  If  the  vessel  and  cargo  were  not  seized,  the  own- 
ers, agents,  factors,  and  freighters  of  the  vessel  had  to  pay 
double  the  worth  of  ship  and  cargo.  The  master  and  com- 
mander, together  with  all  other  persons  knowingly  concerned, 
were  each  subject  to  a  fine  of  not  less  than  five  hundred  or 
more  than  three  thousand  dollars  whether  or  not  the  vessel 
was  seized. 

Suspicion,  according  to  the  act,  justified  interference.  By 
this  law  all  commanders  of  the  public  armed  vessels,  including 
gun  boats,  revenue  cutters,  and  revenue  boats,  were  authorized 
to  stop  and  examine  any  boat,  flat,  or  vessel,  whether  American 
or  foreign  and  whether  on  the  high  seas  or  within  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  Unittni  States,  if  there  was  "reason  to  suspect"  it 
to  be  engaged  in  business  prohibited  by  the  embargo  laws.  If 
the  suspicion  proved  to  be  justified,  the  commander  making 
the  examination  was  instructed  to  send  the  boat  to  the  closest 
Ignited  States  port  for  trial. 

The  eighth  section  authorized  the  Comptroller  of  the  Treas- 
ury to  remit  ''duties  accruing  on  the  importation  of  goods 
of  domestic  produce,  or  which,  being  of  foreign  produce,  had 
been  exported  without  receiving  a  drawback,  which  maj-  have 
been,  or  may  be  re-imported  in  vessels  owned  by  citizens  of 
the  United  States,  and  which  having  sailed  subsequent  to  the 
first  day  of  October  last,  and  prior  to  the  twenty-second  day 
of  December  last,  may  be  or  have  been  stopped  on  the  high 
seas  by  foreign  armed  vessels,  and  by  reason  thereof  have 
returned,  or  may  hereafter  return  into  the  United  States." 
The  Comptroller  was  likewise  authorized  to  direct  bonds  given 
for  foreign  merchandise,  exported  Avith  the  right  of  drawback 
and  reimported  in  the  same  vessel,  to  be  cancelled,  provide^ 
the  duties  on  reimportation  had  been  previously  paid  and  other 
necessary  conditions  and  restrictions  were  complied  with. 
The  next  article  provided  that  during  the  continuance  of 
the  embargo  no  foreign  ships  or  vessels  should  go  from  one 


THE  AMERICAN  J:MBAIIG0,  1807-1809  53 

port  of  the  United  States  to  another.  If  this  provision  was 
violated,  the  vessel  and  cargo  were  to  be  forfeited  and  the 
owner  or  owners,  agent,  factors,  freighters,  and  master  were 
to  be  fined  a  sum  of  not  more  than  three  thousand  or  less 
than  one  thousand  dollars. 

The  next  three  articles  dealt  with  clearance  and  tlie  powers 
of  collectors.  The  tenth  limited  the  amount  of  clearance 
charges  for  each  vessel,  flat,  and  boat  to  a  maximum  of  twenty 
cents  for  each  clearance.  The  next  section  allowed  customs 
collectors  to  detain  vessels  apparently  bound  for  some  other 
port  of  the  United  States,  if  in  their  opinion,  the  intention 
was  to  violate  or  evade  the  embargo  law^s.  The  twelfth  section 
conferred   other   extraordinary  powders  on   collectors. 

The  next  section  related  to  vessels  owned  by  citizens  of  the 
United  States  and  loaded  wholly  or  in  part  with  our  products 
prior  to  the  passage  of  the  embargo.  Such  vessels,  if  detained 
in  any  port  of  the  United  States,  might  be  allowed  to  go  to 
any  of  our  other  ports  and  remain  there  with  cargo  on 
board  subject  to  the  restrictions  and  bonds  prescribed  in  the 
embargo  acts.  The  last  section  expressly  declared  that  no 
provision  of  the  embargo  acts  should  be  construed  in  such  a 
way  as  to  prevent  the  exportation  by  land  or  inland  navigation 
of  furs  and  peltries  owned  by  British  citizens  who  bought 
them  of  the  Indians  from  the  territories  of  the  United  States 
to  those  of  Great  Britain.  Likewise,  no  provision  was  to  be 
so  interpreted  as  to  prevent  the  importation  to  United  States 
territory  by  land  or  inland  navigation  from  British  territory 
of  merchandise  owned  by  British  subjects  and  designed  entire- 
ly for  Indian  use.*° 

When  Congress  assembled  for  its  second  session  on  November 
7,  1808,  further  efforts  were  made  to  strengthen  the  embargo. 
Gallatin  was  appealed  to  for  advice  on  the  embargo  and  its 
enforcement.  He  replied,  November  24,  that  in  order  to  pre- 
vent more  effectually  coasting  vessels  regularly  cleared,  from 
violating  the  embargo,   two  measures  appeared  necessary: 

(1)     Increase  in  the  amount  of  bond;  and 


40  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.  18,  pp.   2870-2874. 


54        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

(2)  Refusal  to  allow  capture,  distress,  or  any  other  accident 
to  be  admitted  as  a  plea  or  given  in  evidence  on  trial. 

To  prevent  vessels  from  departing  without  clearances  in  open 
defiance  of  the  law,   he   recommended  that : 

(1)  The  permission  of  collector  be  required  before  any 
vessel  was  bonded ; 

(2)  The  owner  be  considered  as  the  man  whose  name  ap- 
peared on  the  register  or  license; 

(3)  The  collector  be  given  power  to  seize  unusual  deposits; 

(4)  The  use  of  gun  boats,  war  vessels,  and  the  building 
of  ten  or  twelve  additional  cutters  to  enforce  the  embargo ;  and 

(5)  Use  of  militia  on  application  of  collectors  to  enforce 
embargo. 

Other  suggestions  made  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
were : 

(1)  Prohibition  of  exportation  of  specie; 

(2)  Detention  of  "wagons  and  other  carriages  laden  and 
actually  on  their  way  to  a  foreign  territory"; 

(3)  Making  the  preparation  of  goods  for  exportation  pun- 
ishable ; 

(4)  Trial  of  suits  against  collectors  in  the  United  States 
courts ; 

(5)  "Making  it  a  penal  offense  to  take  property  which  by 
virtue  of  any  law  of  the  United  States  is  in  the  collector's 
possession" ; 

(6)  Allowing  "the  district  judges  to  set  aside,  on  motion 
of  the  district  attorney,"  low  valuations  of  property  seized 
by  United  States  officers  vested  with  discharging  the  embargo 
laws,  when  by  that  low  valuation  the  property  reverted  to  the 
original  owner;  and 

(7)  Defining  precisely  by  law  the  question  of  jurisdiction 
on  the  subject  of  mandamus.*^ 

In  accordance,  for  the  most  part,  with  Gallatin's  advice,  the 
last,  longest,  and  most  fiercely  debated  of  the  embargo  acts 
was  approved  January  9,  1809.  The  first  section  declared  that 
it  was  a  violation  of  the  law  to  "put,  place,  or  load,  on  board 
any  ship,  vessel,  boat,  or  water  craft  or  into  any  cart,  wagon. 


41   The  American  Register,  Vol.   IV,   pp.   263-267. 


THE  AMERICAN  I^MBARGO,  1807-1809  55 

sled,  or  other  carriage  or  vehicle,  with  or  without  wheels,  any 
specie,  goods,  wares,  or  merchandise,  with  intent  to  export, 
transport,  or  convey  the  same  without  the  United  States  or 
the  territories  thereof,  to  any  foreign  place,  kingdom,  or 
country  or  with  intent  to  convey  the  same  on  board  any  for- 
eign ship  or  vessel  within  or  without  the  limits  of  the  United 
States  or  with  the  intent  in  any  other  manner  to  evade  the 
acts  to  which  this  act  is  a  supplement."  Violation  incurred 
the  forfeiture  of  the  produce  and  all  conveyances  used  in  its 
removal,  and  subjected  all  parties  concerned  to  the  crime  of 
"high  misdemeanors"  and  a  fine,  on  conviction,  "equal  to  four 
times  the  value  of  such  specie,  goods,  wares,  and  merchandise." 
This  section,  however,  was  not  to  be  so  construed  as  to  extend 
to  persons  other  than  the  owners  who  first  informed  the  col- 
lector of  the  district  about  the  violation  and  made  complaint. 
In  order  to  encourage  the  giving  of  information  half  the  fine 
was  to  be  turned  over  to  such  persons. 

The  second  section  stated  in  detail  the  conditions  under 
which  ships  might  be  loaded: 

(1)  A  peraiit  naming  the  articles  to  be  loaded  had  to  ho 
previously  obtained  from  the  collector  of  the  district  concerned, 
or  from  a  revenue  officer  specifically  authorized  by  him. 

(2)  Lading  must  be  under  the  inspection  of  the  lawful 
revenue  officers. 

(3)  Bond  must  be  given  by  the  owner,  consignee  or  factor, 
and  master  to  six  times  the  worth  of  vessel  and  cargo  that  the 
vessel  would  not  leave  without  a  clearance,  nor  leaving,  proceed 
to  a  foreign  port,  or  place  on  board  any  article  from  another 
vessel. 

(4)  Entire  cargo  must  be  landed  in  a  port  of  the  United 
States  designated  in  the  clearance  paper  or  relanded  in  the 
port  from  which  the  vessel  sailed. 

The  customs  collectors  were  authorized  to  refuse  permission 
to  load  any  vessel  when  they  believed  there  existed  an  inten- 
tion to  violate  the  emliargo,  or  when  they  were  so  directed 
by  the  president.  This  section,  however,  did  not  apply  to 
ships,  vessels,  and  boats  uniformly  employed  within  waters 
subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  United  States.  They  came 
under  the  provisions  of  the  fourth  section. 


56        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

The  third  section  declared  that  the  owners  and  consignees 
or  factors  of  boats  described  above  should,  if  the  boats  were 
laden  in  whole  or  in  part,  discharge  their  cargo  or  give  bond. 
If  the  cargo  was  not  discharged  within  ten  days  or  the  bond 
given  within  three  days  after  the  notice  had  been  given,  vessel 
and  cargo  were  to  be  entirely  forfeited.  The  collectors,  how- 
ever, were  authorized  to  order  cargoes  discharged  for  the  same 
reason  as  they  might  give  for  refusing  to  allow  the  further 
loading  of  vessels.  They  were  likewise  authorized  to  take 
possession  of  such  vessels  until  the  cargoes  were  discharged  or 
bonds  given. 

The  next  three  sections  related  to  the  granting  of  a  general 
permission  to  vessels  uniformly  employed  in  waters  within  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  United  States  if  there  was  no  danger  of 
the  embargo  being  violated  and  if  bond  had  been  given  in  due 
form.  If  the  general  permission  and  general  bond  were  not  first 
obtained  and  merchandise  was  taken  on  board  contrary  to  law, 
the  vessel  together  with  the  cargo  was  to  be  entirely  forfeited. 
Moreover,  the  owner,  agent,  freighter,  or  factors,  master  or 
commander  would  "severally  forfeit  and  pay  a  sum  equal  to 
the  value  of  the  ship,  vessel,  or  boat,  and  of  the  cargo  put  on 
board  the  same." 

If  a  new  register  or  license  was  granted  during  the  contin- 
uance of  the  embargo  acts  or  if  a  ship  neither  registered  nor 
licensed  was  sold,  a  bond  to  the  United  States  with  at  least  one 
surety  to  the  amount  of  three  hundred  dollars  for  each  ton 
of  the  vessel  had  to  be  required  by  the  collector.  These  terms, 
however,  did  njt  apply  to  bona  fide  sales  made  before  the  act 
was  passed  either  in  the  waters  of  the  United  States  or  in 
foreign  waters. 

The  seventh  section  was  particularly  stringent.  Vessels  sail- 
ing from  one  United  States  port  to  another  under  the  proper 
bonds  were  compelled,  within  two  months  after  date  of  sailing, 
to  bring  to  the  port  of  clearing  a  certificate  from  the  collector 
of  the  port  designated  declaring  that  the  goods  had  been 
landed  there.  If  the  voyage  was  from  New  Orleans  to  an 
Atlantic  port  or  vice  versa,  four  months  Avere  allowed  for 
producing  the  certificate.  If  the  bond  was  not  produced  by 
the  specified  time,  suit  was  to  be  instituted  and  judgment  given 


i 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  57 

against  the  defendant  unless  proof  could  be  given  of  the  re- 
landing,  "or  of  loss  of  the  vessel  at  sea."  Capture,  distress, 
and  other  accidents  were  not  allowed  to  be  advanced  unless 
they  occurred  under   conditions  carefully   set   forth. 

The  next  section  provided  that  a  registered  or  sea-letter 
vessel  could  not,  even  though  in  ballast,  receive  a  clearance 
or  depart  if  the  bond  required  for  coasting  trade  had  not 
been  previously  given. 

The  ninth  section  gave  well-nigh  absolute  powers  to  customs 
collectors.  They  were  instructed  to  seize  specie  or  goods 
found  on  board  any  water  craft  when  there  was  reason  to 
believe  such  articles  were  intended  for  exportation.  Likewise, 
if  specie  or  goods  were  in  vessels,  carts,  wagons,  sleighs  or  any 
other  carriage,  or  in  any  way  presumably  on  the  road  to  ter- 
ritories of  foreign  powers,  or  the  vicinities  thereof,  or  a  place 
from  which  they  were  to  be  exported,  they  were  to  be  seized. 
Permission  for  removal  was  not  to  be  granted  "until  bond 
with  sufficient  sureties"  had  been  granted  to  insure  the  land- 
ing of  the  articles  in  some  part  of  the  United  States,  where, 
in  the  opinion  of  the  collector,  there  was  no  danger  of  the 
articles  being  exported. 

The  next  section  was  designed  to  protect  the  collectors  in 
the  proper  discharge  of  their  duties.  If  suit  was  brought 
against  any  collector  or  his  agent  acting  under  the  present 
embargo  act,  he  could  "plead  the  general  issue,  and  give  this 
act  and  the  instructions  and  regulations  of  the  President  in 
evidence  for  his  justification  and  defence."  Any  individual 
hurt  by  the  collector's  acts  could  file  his  petition  before  the 
district  court  having  jurisdiction  over  the  collector,  state  the 
facts,  and  after  notice  had  been  given  to  the  collector  and  dis- 
trict attorney,  have  the  court  hear  and  judge  "as  law  and 
justice  may  require."  The  judgment,  reasons,  and  facts  in 
the  case  were  to  be  filed  in  the  court  records.  If  the  case  went 
against  the  collector,  the  party  was  required  to  give  the  usual 
bond  or  bonds.  If,  hoAvever,  the  court  judged  against  the 
petitioner  and  in  favor  of  the  collector,  the  latter  was  entitled 
to  treble  costs  "which  shall  be  taxed  for  him,  and  execution 
awarded  accordingly  by  the  court." 

In  order  to  prevent  armed  resistance  to  the  embargo  laws 


58        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

the  president  was  empowered  to  use  any  part  of  the  land 
forces,  naval  forces,  or  militia  of  the  United  States  or  its 
territories  judged  necessary  to  prevent  the  unlawful  departure 
of  vessels,  provide  for  the  detention  and  custody  of  ships, 
specie,  or  goods,  and  provide  for  the  prevention  and  suspension 
of  armed  and  riotous  assemblages  which  resisted  the  custom 
house  offiicers  while  exercising  their  duties,  or  in  any  way 
opposed  carrying  into  effect  the  laws  laying  an  embargo,  or  in 
any  other  way  violated  or  assisted  and  abetted  violations  of  the 
embargo  laws. 

The  twelfth  section  dealt  in  detail  with  the  question  of  penal- 
ties. The  next  section  authorized  the  president  to  hire  and  arm 
thirty  vessels,  not  exceeding  one  hundred  and  thirty  tons  each, 
for  immediate  service  in  enforcing  the  laws  of  the  United 
States  on  the  sea  coast.  This  power,  however,  was  limited  to 
one  year,  and  all  ships  were  to  be  employed  "under  the 
direction  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury." 

The  last  two  sections  declared,  in  the  first  place,  that  the 
seventh  section  of  the  act  of  March  12,  1808,  which  allowed 
the  president  "to  grant  permission  to  citizens  having  property 
of  value  in  places  without  the  jurisdiction  of  the  United 
States,  to  dispatch  vessels  for  the  same"  should  cease;  and  in 
the  second  place,  that  the  act  should  be  in  force  only  so  long 
as  the  original  embargo  act  was  enforced.*^ 

The  embargo  regulations  increased  in  severity  as  the  above 
summaries  show.  The  first  act,  brief  and  hurried,  aimed  only 
at  the  stopping  of  exports  at  sea.  The  act  of  January  8,  1808, 
was  a  longer  act  and  prescribed  minutely  penalties  of  increas- 
ing severity  for  law  violations.  It  included  in  its  application 
coasting  and  fishing  vessels.  The  act  of  March  12  attempted 
to  stop  all  commerce  with  the  world,  whether  by  land  or  water. 
The  act  of  April  25  was  longer  than  any  of  its  predecessors; 
it  took  up  in  detail  the  question  of  penalties  which  were  in- 
creased in  severity  as  the  law  increased  in  stringency,  gave 
the  collectors  increased  power,  minutely  regulated  the  IMississ- 
ippi  River  trade,  and,  in  short,  attempted  to  stop  absolutely 
all  trade  even  with  foreign  nations  whose  territory  bordered 

42  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.   19,  pp.   1798-1804. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  59 

on  ours.  The  last  act,  that  of  January  9,  1809,  was  one  of  the 
most  drastic  ever  passed  by  any  Congress.  Coasting  vessels 
were  required  to  give  impossible  bonds — six  times  the  value  of 
vessel  and  cargo,  collectors  were  given  despotic  powers,  and 
the  right  to  plead  capture,  distress,  or  accident  was  well-nigh 
prohibited.  It  proved  to  be  the  death  blow  to  the  embargo 
system. 

During  the  year  1808  the  votes  on  the  embargo  varied  little, 
but  an  analysis  of  two  votes  will  be  made  in  order  to  show  the 
location  of  the  opposition.  The  House,  April  19,  passed  an 
embargo  law  by  a  vote  of  60  to  38.  Seven  of  the  negative  votes 
came  from  Connecticut,  six  from  Virginia,  four  each  from 
Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  and  North  Carolina,  three  each  from 
Massachusetts  and  New  York,  two  apiece  from  Kentucky  and 
South  Carolina,  and  one  each  from  New  Hampshine,  Tennessee 
and  Georgia.  Thus,  if  the  names  are  crorectly  recorded  the 
South  cast  seventeen  votes  against  the  measure,  New  England 
eleven,  the  Middle  States  seven,  and  the  West  three.  In  other 
words  more  opposition  was  recorded  to  the  embargo  south  of 
the  Mason  and  Dixon  line  than  north  of  it.*^  The  Senate 
likewise  passed  the  bill,  apparently  with  little  debate,  on  April 
22,  by  a  vote  of  21  to  5.  The  negative  votes  were  cast  by 
Goodrich  and  Hillhouse  of  Connecticut,  Mitchill  of  New  York, 
Pickering  of  Massachusetts  and  A\"hite  of  Delaware.  Thus,  no 
Senate  opposition  was  recorded  south  of  Delaware.** 
J  The  growing  agitation  in  the  country  had  no  apparent  effect 
on  Jefferson's  control  in  Congress  other  than  to  unite  the 
South  in  his  support  and  to  strengthen  northern  opposition. 
The  enforcement  bill  passed  first  in  the  Senate  December  21, 
by  a  vote  of  20  to  7.  The  opposition  votes  were  cast  by 
Nicholas  Gilman  of  New  Hampshire,  James  Hillhouse  and 
Chauncey  Goodrich  of  Connecticut,  James  Lloyd  and  Timothy 
Pickering  of  Massachusetts,  Elisha  IMathewson  of  Rhode  Island, 
and  Samuel  White  of  Delaware.*"'  In  spite  of  bitter  debates 
in  the  House,  the  vote,  January  G,  1809.  was  71  to  32.  Num- 
bered in  the  negative,  nevertheless,  were  votes  from  thirteen 


43  Annals  of  Congress,  p.  2245. 

44  Ibid.,  Vol.  17,  p.  372. 

45  Ibid.,  Vol.   19,  p.  298. 


60        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

states,  even  though  nineteen  of  the  votes  came  from  Connec- 
ticut, Massachusetts,  and  New  York  thus  proving  that  economic 
pressure  was  greater  there  or  loyalty  to  the  administration  less 
strong.  Connecticut  cast  seven  votes  against  the  enforcement 
act;  Massachusetts  and  New  York  six  apiece;  Pennsylvania, 
Virginia,  and  North  Carolina  two  each;  and  Vermont,  New 
Hampshire,  Ehode  Island,  Delaware,  New  Jersey,  Maryland, 
and  Kentucky  each  cast  one  negative  vote.  South  Carolina, 
Georgia,  Tennessee,  Ohio,  and  Louisiana  offered  no  opposition.**^ 

New  England  was  strongly  opposed  to  the  embargo  through- 
out the  period.  Hillhouse  of  Connecticut  and  Pickering,  Liv- 
ermore  and  Quiney  of  Massachusetts  best  represented  this 
section.  It  should  be  noted,  however,  that  some  representatives 
as  Cook  and  Bacon  of  Massachusetts  at  times  supported  the 
administration.  Though  more  divided  in  sentiment  than  New 
England,  the  Middle  States  usually  supported  the  administra- 
tion. Some  notable  exceptions  were  Gardenier  and  Masters 
of  New  York,  Key  of  Maryland,  Bayard  of  Delaware,  and 
Sloan  of  New  Jersey.  The  South  and  West,  while  moderating 
their  attitude  as  time  passed,  nevertheless  supported  the  em- 
bargo policy,  though  several  individuals  as  Randolph  of  Vir- 
ginia, Troup  of  Georgia,  and  Lyon  of  Kentucky  consistently 
or  occasionally  oj^posed  it.  The  most  prominent  and  influen- 
tial representatives  of  the  South  and  West,  however,  as  Giles 
of  Virginia,  Macon  of  North  Carolina,  Williams  of  South 
Carolina,  Johnson  of  Kentucky,  and  Campbell  of  Tennessee 
supported  the  embargo  policy. 

A  few  typical  extracts  from  speeches  made  by  a  few  of 
these  men  will  be  cited.  In  the  House,  on  December  29,  1807, 
Edward  St.  Loe  Livermore  of  Massachusetts,  in  opposition  to 
the  embargo  discussed  its  effect  on  the  fishermen.  He  declared 
that  their  living  was  precarious  at  best,  and  that  throwing 
six  thousand  people  out  of  employment  was  a  serious  evil.  He 
said  that  surely  a  general  embargo  could  not  be  intended  to 
deprive  them  of  their  necessary  work,  a  work  that  created 
"three  millions  out  of  nothing."     ''By  suffering  them  to  pur- 

46  Ihicl.,  p.   538. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  61 

sue  their  avocations  on  the  ocean,"  he  asked,  "did  it  permit 
these  men  to  violate  any  existing  law?"*^ 

"As  to  its  greatness,"  said  Josiah  Quincy,  on  April  19,  in  discussing 
the  power  and  novelty  of  the  embargo,  "nothing  is  like  it.  Every  class 
of  men  feels  it.  Every  interest  in  the  nation  is  affected  by  it.  The 
merchant,  the  farmer,  the  planter,  the  mechanic,  the  laboring  poor;  all 
are  sinking  under  its  weight.  But  there  is  this  peculiar  in  it;  that  there 
is  no  equality  in  its  nature.  It  is  not  like  taxation,  which  raises  revenue 
according  to  the  average  of  wealth,  burdening  the  rich  and  letting  the 
poor  go  free.  But  it  presses  upon  the  particular  classes  of  society  in 
an  inverse  ratio  to  the  capacity  of  eac  hto  bear  it.  .  .  ."48 

/  On  November  28,  Quincy  while  speaking  on  foreign  relations, 
made  a  strong  attack  on  the  embargo  as  a  direct  subservience 
to  the  views  of  the  French  emperor.*^  The  measure  came  at 
a  time,  he  urged,  when  the  movement  against  Great  Britain 
was  most  auspicious  of  success.  In  its  operation,  he  declared, 
the  American  embargo  was  a  coalition  with  France  against 
British  commerce.  Changing  his  viewpoint,  Quincy  then  de- 
clared that  Great  Britain's  objects  by  her  orders  in  council 
were:  first  "to  excite  distress  among  the  people  of  the  contin- 
ent," and,  second  "to  secure  to  herself  that  commerce  of  which 
she  deprived  neutrals."  Our  embargo,  he  said,  cooperated  with 
her  views  in  both  respects,  for  our  abdication  of  the  ocean 
deprived  the  continent  of  the  advantages  of  commerce  more 
than  it  would  have  been  possible  for  the  British  Navy  to 
effect.  According  to  him,  then,  the  United  States  played  into 
the  hands  of  Both  France  and  England  by  passing  the  em- 
bargo. 

In  answer  to  Nathaniel  Macon  of  North  Carolina  who  had 
declared  that  he  preferred  three  years  of  embargo  to  war  and 
to  John  Clopton  of  Virginia  who  expressly  stated  that  we 
should  not  allow  our  vessels  to  go  upon  the  ocean  again  until 
the  orders  and  decrees  of  the  warring  nations  were  rescinded, 
Quincy  said: 
Good  Heavens!     Mr.  Chairman,  are  men  mad?     Is  this  House  touched 


47  Aniiala  of  Congress,  Vol.    IT,   p.   1248.      William  Milnor  of   Pennsylvania   at   once 

replied  that   "one  of  the   principal  objects  of  the  embargo  was  to  preserve  our  sea- 
men"   (,)bid.,  p.  1252). 

48  Ibid.,  Vol.  18,  p.  2205. 

♦9  Ibid.,  Vol.  19,  pp.  534-547. 


62        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

with  that  insanity  which  is  the  never-failing  precursor  of  the  intention 
of  Heaven  to  destroy?  The  people  of  New  England,  after  eleven  months 
deprivation  of  the  ocean,  to  be  commanded  still  longer  to  abandon  it, 
for  an  undefined  period  to  hold  their  inalienable  rights  at  the  tenure  of 
the  will  of  Britain  or  of  Bonaparte?  A  people,  commercial  in  all  aspects, 
in  all  their  relations,  in  all  their  recollections  of  the  past,  in  all  their 
prospects  of  the  future — a  people,  whose  first  love  was  the  ocean,  the 
choice  of  their  childhood,  the  approbation  of  their  manly  years,  the 
most  precious  inheritance  of  their  fathers,  in  the  midst  of  their  success, 
in  the  moment  of  the  most  exquisite  perception  of  commercial  prosperity, 
to  be  commanded  to  abandon  it,  not  for  a  limited  time,  but  for  a  time 
unlimited — not  until  they  can  be  prepared  to  defend  themselves  there,  (for 
that  is  not  pretended)  but  until  their  rivals  recede  from  it — not  until  their 
necessities  require,  but  until  foreign  nations  permit!  I  am  lost  in  astonish- 
ment, Mr.  Chairman.  I  have  not  words  to  express  the  matchless  absurdity 
of  this  attempt.  I  have  no  tongue  to  express  thp  swift  and  headlong 
destruction  which  a  blind  perseverance  in  such  a  system  must  bring  upon 
this  nation. 50 

In  answer  to  one  of  his  colleagues,  Ezekiel  Bacon,  who  held 
that  Massachusets  was  not  suffering  so  much  as  represented, 
that  the  lower  prices  of  beef,  pork,  butter,  and  cheese  tended 
to  equalize  the  higher  prices  of  tea,  sugar,  salt.  West  India 
rum,  and  molasses,  Quincy  asked: 

But  has  my  honorable  colleague  travelled  on  the  seaboard?  Has  he 
witnessed  the  state  of  our  cities?  Has  he  seen  our  ships  rotting  at  our 
wharves;  our  wharves  deserted,  our  stores  tenantless,  our  streets  bereft 
of  active  business;  industry  forsaking  her  beloved  haunts,  and  hope  fled 
away  from  places  where  she  had  from  earliest  time  been  accustomed  to 
make  and  to  fulfill  her  most  precious  promises?  Has  he  conversed  with 
the  merchant,  and  heard  the  tale  of  his  embarrassments — his  capital 
arrested  in  his  hands,  forbidden  by  your  laws  to  resort  to  a  market, 
with  property  four  times  sufficient  to  discharge  all  his  engagements, 
necessitated  to  hang  on  the  precarious  mercy  of  moneyed  institutions 
for  that  indulgence  which  preserves  him  from  stopping  payment — the 
first  step  towards  bankruptcy?  Has  he  conversed  with  the  mechanic? 
Has  he  seen  him  either  destitute  of  employment  or  obliged  to  seek  it  in 
labors  odious  to  him,  because  he  was  not  educated  to  them?  .  .  .si 

Quincy  insisted  that  it  was  impossible  to  enforce  the  em- 
bargo laws,  and  that  the  appeal  to  patriotism  was  useless,  for, 
said  he:  "You  cannot  lay  a  man  upon  the  rack  and  crack  his 
muscles  by  slow   torment,   and   call   patriotism   to   soothe   the 

50  Ibid.,  p.   538. 

51  Ibid.,  pp.   538,   539. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  63 

sufferer.  "^^  He  next  suggested  a  doubt  as  to  the  constitution- 
ality of  the  embargo  laws,  declared  them  failures  as  measures 
of  coercion  against  foreign  powers,  denied  that  they  saved 
resources  and  insisted  that  repeal  would  not  mean  the  payment 
of  tribute.  Three  of  his  closing  paragraphs  are  worth  quoting 
entire : 

However,  suppose  that  the  payment  of  this  duty  is  inevitable,  which 
it  certainly  is  not,  let  me  ask,  is  embargo  independence?  Deceive  not 
yourselves.  It  is  palpable  submission.  Gentlemen  exclaim,  'Great  Britain 
smites  us  on  one  cheek,'  and  what  does  the  Administration?  It  'turns 
the  other  also.'  France  and  Great  Britain  require  you  to  relinquish 
a  part  of  your  commerce,  and  you  yield  it  entirely.  Sir,  this  conduct 
may  be  the  way  to  dignity  and  honor  in  another  world,  but  it  will  never 
secure   safety  and  independence  in  this. 

At  every  corner  of  this  great  city,  we  meet  some  gentlemen  of  the 
majority  wringing  their  hands  and  exclaiming,  'What  shall  we  do? 
Nothing  but  the  embargo  will  save  us!  Remove  it,  and  what  shall  we 
do?'  Sir,  it  is  not  for  me,  an  humble  and  uninfluential  individual,  at 
an  awful  distance  from  the  predominant  influences,  to  suggest  plans  of 
government.  But,  to  my  eye,  the  path  of  our  duty  is  as  distinct  as  the 
milky  way — all  studded  with  living  sapphires — glowing  with  cumulating 
light.  It  is  the  path  of  active  preparation — of  dignified  energy.  It  is  the 
path  of  1776.  It  consists  not  in  abandoning  our  rights,  but  in  supporting 
them  as  they  exist,  and  where  they  exist — on  the  ocean  as  well  as  on  the 
land.  It  consists  in  taking  the  nature  of  things  as  the  measure  of  the 
rights  of  your  citizens,  not  the  orders  and  decrees  of  imperious  foreign- 
ers. Give  what  protection  you  can.  Take  no  counsel  of  fear.  Your 
strength  will  increase  with  the  trial,  and  prove  greater  than  you  are 
now  aware. 

But,  I  shall  be  told  this  may  lead  to  war.  I  ask,  are  we  now  at  peace? 
Certainly  not,  unless  retiring  from  insult  be  peace — unless  shrinking 
under  the  lash  be  peace.  The  surest  way  to  prevent  war  is,  not  to  fear 
it.  The  idea  that  nothing  on  earth  is  so  dreadful  as  war,  is  inculcated 
too  studiously  among  us.  Disgrace  is  worse.  Abandonment  of  essential 
rights  is  worse. ss 

On  the  next  day,  November  29,  Ezekiel  Bacon  of  Massachu- 
setts replied  to  Quincy's  speech.  He  urged  that  Quincy  was 
not  the  only  representative  of  Massachusetts  and  that  embargo 
opponents  had  overstated  the  case  though  the  people  ''have 
suffered  and  are  now  suffering  much."  He  urged  that  he  had 
travelled  through  the  state,   visited  in  the  cities,  and  talked 

52  Ibid.,  p.  541. 

53  Ibid.,  p.  547. 


64        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

with  more  than  one  merchant  who  had  himself  as  many  of  his 
ships  rotting  at  the  wharves  as  had  most  merchants  of  our 
country,  and  had  found  many  of  them,  though  suffering  their 
full  proportion  of  the  general  pressure  of  the  time,  satisfied 
that  nothing  better  could  have  been  done.^* 

Only  one  embargo  opponent  from  the  Middle  States  will 
be  noted.  On  February  20,  1808,  Barent  Gardenier  of  New 
York  attacked  the  embargo  in  a  speech  as  virulent  and  insult- 
ing perhaps  as  any  John  Randolph  ever  made.     He  asserted: 

The  more  the  original  measure  develops  itself,  the  more  I  am  satisfied 
that  my  first  view  of  it  was  correct;  that  it  was  a  sly,  cunning  measure. 
That  its  real  object  was  not  merely  to  prevent  our  vessels  from  going 
out,  but  to  effect  a  non-intercourse.  Are  the  nations  prepared  for  this? 
If  you  wish  to  try  whether  they  are,  tell  them  at  once  what  is  your 
object — tell  them  what  you  mean — tell  them  you  mean  to  take  part  with 
the  Grand  Pacificator;  or  else  stop  your  present  course.  Do  not  go  on 
forging  claims  to  fasten  us  to  the  car  of  the  Imperial  Conqueror.ss 

In  spite  of  a  call  to  order  by  the  Speaker,  Gardenier  gath- 
ered heat  as  he  continued.  The  two  paragraphs  which  follow 
resulted  in  a  second  call  to  order  and  a  hurried  conclusion : 

I  am  grieved  to  see  that  we  are  perpetually  engaged  in  making  addi- 
tions and  supplements  to  the  embargo  law.  Wherever  we  can  espy  a 
hole,  if  it  be  no  bigger  than  a  wheat  straw,  at  which  the  industry  and 
enterprise  of  our  country  can  find  vent,  all  our  powers  are  called  into 
requisition  to  stop  it  up.  The  people  of  this  country  shall  sell  nothing 
but  what  they  sell  to  each  other.  All  our  surplus  produce  shall  rot  on 
our  hands.  God  knows  what  all  this  means!  I,  sir,  I  cannot  under- 
stand it.  I  am  astonished— indeed  I  am  astonished  and  dismayed.  .  I 
sec  effects;  but  I  can  trace  them  to  no  cause.  Yes,  sir,  I  do  fear  that 
there  is  an  unseen  hand  which  is  guiding  us  to  the  most  dreadful 
destinies — unseen,  because  it  cannot  endure  the  light.  Darkness  and 
mystery  overshadow  this  House  and  this  whole  nation.  We  know  noth- 
ing, we  are  permitted  to  know  nothing.  We  sit  here  as  mere  automata; 
we  legislate  without  knowing,  nay,  sir,  without  wishing  to  know  why 
or  wherefore.  We  are  told  what  we  are  to  do,  and  the  Council  of  Five 
Hundred  do  it.  We  move,  but  why  or  wherefore  no  man  knows;  we 
are  put  in  motion,  but  how,  I  for  one  cannot  tell.  .  . 

If  the  motives  and  the  principles  of  the   Administration  are  honest 


54  Ibid.,  pp.  563,   564. 

55  Ibid.,  Vol.  18,  p.  15C4.  Remarks  growing  out  of  this  speech  led  to  a  duel  with 
G.  W.  Campbell  in  which  Gardenier,  the  challenger,  was  wounded  (Relfs  Philadelphia 
Gazette  and  Daily  Advertiser,  March  5,  and  Paulson's  American  Daily  Advertiser, 
March  7). 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  65 

and  patriotic,  wc  would  support  them  with  a  fervor  which  none  could 
surpass.  But,  sir,  we  are  kept  in  total  darkness.  We  are  treated  as 
the  enemies  of  our  country.  We  are  permitted  to  know  nothing,  and 
execrated  because  we  do  not  approve  of  measures,  the  origin  and  ten- 
dency of  which  are  carefully  concealed  from  us  I  We  are  denounced 
because  we  have  no  confidence  in  the  Executive,  at  the  moment  the 
Executive  refuses  to  discover  to  us — even  this  House,  nay,  sir,  this 
nation,  its  actual  condition.  Like  the  Israelites  in  Egypt,  we  are  to 
make  brick  and  find  our  own  straw.  We  are  to  have  faith,  and  find 
out  our  reasons  for  it.     This  course  will  do  in  this  country  no  longer.^e 

On  April  19,  John  Randolph  of  Roanoke  declared  that  there 
were  those  who  did  not  suffer  from  the  embargo,  that  at 
least  one  hundred  thousand  barrels  of  flour  had  been  .shipped 
from  Baltimore  alone  since  the  embargo  was  passed,  that  the 
embargo  only  furnished  rogues  an  opportunity  of  getting 
rich  at  the  expense  of  honest  men,  that  bonds  were  forfeited, 
that  speculators  bought  up  property  at  half  its  value,  that 
a  premium  was  placed  on  dishonesty,  and  that  morals  were 
consequently  lowered.  He  contended  that  flour  was  carried 
so  freely  to  the  West  Indies  that  it  became  a  point  of  honor 
not  to  tell  on  one  another."  On  November  30,  Randolpli  drew 
a  harrowing  picture  of  the  embargo  effect  on  tobacco,  which 
he  summarized  as  "  deplorable.  "^^ 

On  the  same  day,  R.  M.  Johnson  of  Kentucky  in  the  course 
of  a  long  speech^^  had  declared  that  the  AVest  Indies  were 
already  feeling  the  pressure  of  the  embargo,  for  flour  had  sold 
from  twenty  to  sixty  dollars  per  barrel,  and  that  Great 
Britain  was  deprived  of  four  million  pounds  worth  of  tobacco, 
cotton,  wheat,  and  the  substantials  of  life.  We  bought  twelve 
million  pounds  worth  of  manufactured  goods  and  received 
money  by  European  trade  to  pay  the  balance  of  eight  million 
pounds,  he  said.  This  trade  was  destroyed,  he  urged,  not  by 
the  embargo,  but  by  the   orders  in  council.®" 

Embargo  opponents,  as  John  Randolph  and  Josiah  Quincy. 
early   cast   doubts   on  the    constitutionality   of   the    embargo; 


56  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.  18,  pp.  1656,   1657. 

57  Ibid.,   pp.   2239,   2240. 

58  Ibid.,  Vol.   19,  p.   598. 

59  Ibid.,  pp.  581-590. 

60  Ibid.,  p.  587. 


C  :        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

hence  some  of  the  strong  embargo  supporters,  as  R.  M.  John- 
son of  Kentucky,®^  6.  W.  Campbell  of  Tcnnessee,^^  and  D.  R. 
Williams  of  South  Carolina,  took  up  the  matter.  The  latter 
declared  in  part: 

I  contend  that  the  power  to  lay  an  embargo  is  granted  in  the  power 
to  regulate  commerce  with  foreign  nations,  and  among  the  several 
states,  and  with  the  Indian  tribes!  If  you  cannot  prohibit  commerce 
with  a  particular  post  or  nation,  of  what  avail  is  the  power  to  regulate 
it?  .  .  .  The  embargo  is  not  an  annihilation  but  a  suspension  of  com- 
merce to  regain  the  advantage  of  which  it  has  been  robbed;  it  follows 
that  it  is  a  constitutional   regulation  of  commerce.^^ 

L  It  appears  advisable  just  at  this  time,  without  further  quo- 
tations, to  summarize  the  principal  Congressional  arguments 
for  and  against  the  embargo.  The  main  arguments  for  the 
embargo  were:  It  preserves  our  seamen,  property,  and  other 
resources,  and  gives  adequate  protection  to  our  citizens.  It 
will  bring  foreign  nations  to  terms  and  force  them  to  do 
justice  to  the  United  States.  In  the  case  of  England  it  injures 
her  manufactures  by  depriving  her  of  raw  materials,  and  un- 
dermines her  naval  strength  through  the  loss  of  naval  stores. 
France  is  injured  through  the  loss  of  luxuries,  and  Spain, 
her  ally,  is  injured  even  more.  It  will  starve  the  West  Indies 
and  thus  force  the  mother  countries  to  repeal  their  obnoxious 
orders  and  decrees.  Later,  embargo  friends  contended  that 
they  could  not  have  foreseen  that  the  European  nations  would 
let  their  colonies  starve.  It  prevents  war  without  giving  just 
cause  for  offense.  Remove  embargo,  and  war  more  costly  than 
the  present  system  is  inevitable,  said  the  embargo  advocate. 
It  encourages  the  developing  of  manufactures  and  the  building 
of  houses.  It  operates  on  all  sections  of  the  union.  Later, 
when  losses  could  not  be  denied,  the  blame  was  placed  not 
upon  the  embargo,  but  upon  the  English  orders  and  the 
French  decrees. 

The  arguments  against  the  embargo  were  more  varied  and 
more  violent:  It  destroys  our  resources.  Products  of  the 
farm  and  sea  perish.     Sailors  and  fishermen  are  leaving  the 


61  Ibid.,   Vol.  18,  p.  2091. 

62  Ibid.,   p.  2147. 

83  Ibid.,   pp.  2129,  2130. 


THE  AMEEICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  (57 

country.  Agricultural  prices  and  real  estate  are  falling.  Stay 
laws  have  to  be  passed.  Speculation  is  rife.  Money  is  driven 
out  of  the  country.  Interest  rates  are  raised.  Merchants  are 
failing.  Markets  are  lost.  Towns  are  injured.  Poor-houses 
and  prisons  are  crowded.  It  is  not  effective.  France  laughs. 
England  scarcely  notices  the  measure.  No  warring  country 
cares  about  our  embargo.  England  has  already  won  new 
markets.  The  only  party  seriously  injured  is  ourself."  It  was 
passed  in  direct  submission  to  Napoleon  and  was  aimed  at 
England.  It  is  a  recognition  of  a  sendle  position,  a  surrender 
of  sovereignty,  and  means  loss  of  self  respect.  It  has  ruined 
agriculture  and  prostrated  commerce.  Ships  are  rotting  at 
the  wharves,  and  there  is  no  compensating  gain  in  manu- 
factures. It  operates  unequally,  for  some  sections  of  the 
country  suffer  more  than  others,  and  the  poor  are  injured  more 
than  the  rich.  It  dries  up  the  government  revenues.  It  is 
tyrannical,  despotic,  and  indefinite  in  time  of  operation.  It 
has  already  "federalized"  New  England  and  will,  if  continued, 
"federalize"  the  rest  of  the  countr5^  It  cannot  be  enforced. 
Smuggling  is  going  on  continually.  -  Courts  will  not  convict 
and  in  many  cases  their  sittings  have  been  entirely  suspended. 
It  is  unconstitutional  and  threatens  the  danger  of  armed 
opposition  and  a   separation  of  the   states. 

Inasmuch  as  the  avowed  object  of  the  embargo  acts  was 
to  compel  France  and  England  to  rescind  their  obnoxious  de- 
crees and  orders  in  council,  it  will  be  worth  while  to  make 
brief  reference  to  the  diplomatic  correspondence.  France  tried 
to  force  the  United  States  into  the  war  against  England; 
PiUgland,  on  the  other  hand,  attempted  to  make  the  United 
States  its  ally  against  France.^*  Each  tried  to  place  the  blame 
for  our  suffering  on  the  other.  William  Pinckney,  our  min- 
ister to  England,  and  General  Armstrong,  our  minister  to 
France,  labored  long  but  ineffectually  to  bring  about  the  de- 
sired repeal.  Apparently,  the  latter  was  the  first  to  lose  hope. 
On  August  30,  1808,  he  wrote  James  Madison,  our  Secretary 


fi4  See  American  State  Papers,  Class  1,  Foreign  Relations,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  249  for  M. 
Champagny's  letter  and  ibid.,  p.  221,  for  Madison's  statement  as  to  the  desires  of 
both   countries. 


68        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

of  State,  a  brief  note  full  of  prophecy  and  good  advice.  It 
follows  in  part: 

We  have  somewhat  overrated  our  means  of  coercing  the  two  great 
belligerents  to  a  course  of  justice.^  The  embargo  is  a  measure  calculated 
above  any  other,  to  keep  us  whole  and  keep  us  in  peace;  but,  beyond 
this,  you  must  not  count  upon  it.  Here  it  is  not  felt  and  in  England 
(in  the  midst  of  the  more  recent  and  interesting  events  of  the  day) 
it  is  forgotten. 

I  hope  that,  unless  France  shall  do  us  justice,  we  will  raise  the  em- 
bargo, and  make  in  its  stead  the  experiment  of  an  armed  commerce. 
Should  she  adhere  to  her  wicked  and  foolish  measures,  we  ought  not  to 
content  ourselves  with  doing  this;  there  is  much,  very  much  besides 
that  we  can  do  and  we  ought  not  to  omit  doing  all  we  can,  because  it 
is  believed  here  that  we  cannot  do  much,  and  even  that  we  will  not 
do  what  we  have  the  power  of  doing.es 

The  efforts  of  Pinckney  and  Madison  to  secure  removal 
of  the  orders  in  council  were  more  protracted  but  were  equally 
unavailing.  On  September  23,  Canning,  the  English  Secretary, 
addressed  two  notes  to  Pinckney.  One  of  these  was  perhaps 
the  most  sarcastic  note  ever  sent  by  one  diplomat  to  another. 
Canning  held  that  while  the  embargo  did  not  injure  England 
it  should  not  have  been  extended  to  her.  The  cutting  part  of 
the  note,  however,  came  especially  in  this  paragraph : 

His  Majesty  would  not  hesitate  to  contribute  in  any  manner  in  his 
power  to  restore  to  the  commerce  of  the  United  States  its  wonted  activ- 
ity; and  if  it  were  possible  to  make  any  sacrifice  for  the  repeal  of  the 
embargo,  without  appearing  to  deprecate  it  as  a  measure  of  hostility, 
he  would  gladly  have  facilitated  its  removal  as  a  measure  of  incon- 
venient restriction  upon  the  American  people. se 

Pinckney 's  letter  of  December  28,  1808,  to  Canning,  virtual- 
ly closed  the  correspondence  during  the  continuance  of  the 
embargo.  It  was  very  brief,  only  three  sentences,  but  equally 
as  ineffective  as  Armstrong's  attempts  for  diplomatic  victory 
in  France  and  Pinckney 's  other  diplomatic  exchanges  in  Eng- 
land.    The  last  two  sentences  follow: 

It  is  perfectly  true,  as  the  concluding  paragraph  of  your  letter  sup- 
poses  me  to  believe,  that   the  United   States   have   viewed  with   great 

65  Ibid.,  p.  256.  This  was  decidedly  unlike  tiie  attitude  of  Pinclcney,  wlio  a  month 
later,  September  21,  sent  Madison  a  long  economic  argument  in  favor  of  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  embargo    (Ibid.,   pp.  228-230). 

66  Ibid.,  p.  232. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  69 

sensibility  the  pretension  of  this  Government  ...  to  levy  imposts  upon 
their  commerce  outward  and  inward  which  the  orders  in  council  of  the 
last  year  were  to  constrain  to  pass  through  British  ports. 

But  it  is  equally  true  that  my  Government  has  constantly  protested 
against  the  entire  system  with  which  that  pretension  was  connected, 
and  has,  in  consequence,  required  the  repeal,  not  the  modification,  of 
the  British  orders  in  council.67 


67  Ibid.,  p.  240. 


CHAPTER  IV 

ECONOMIC  EFFECTS  OF  THE  EMBARGO  ON  WAR- 
RING NATIONS,  ESPECIALLY  ENGLAND 
AND  HER  COLONIES 

So  far  as  Franee  herself  was  concerned  the  embargo  did  little 
harm.  France  was  an  agricultural  country  and  self-sufficing. 
Prices  of  luxuries  naturally  went  up,  but  this  affected  the 
common  people  only  to  a  small  extent.  Manufactures  were  of 
little  importance,  for  the  industrial  revolution  had  not  yet 
begun,  at  least  to  any  extent;  hence  the  shutting  out  of  cotton 
weighed  little  in  the  scale.  Napoleon  was  well-nigh  master  of 
the  continent  and  supplies  of  various  kinds  came  in  openly 
or  by  smuggling.  Even  some  of  the  French  soldiers  whom 
Napoleon  later  led  against  Moscow  were,  it  is  said,  clothed  in 
English  woolens  and  shod  with  English  shoes.^  On  the  French 
colonies  the  burden  of  the  various  commercial  restrictions  press- 
ed harder,  but  had  they  pressed  with  ten  times  the  weight  on 
France  and  her  colonies,  had  they  deprived  the  people  of 
needed  food  and  left  them  half  starved,  the  autocratic  emperor 
would  still  have  persisted  in  his  decrees  in  the  attempt  to 
bring  England  to  her  knees.  A  man  who  would  not  hesitate  to 
sacrifice  thousands  of  his  beloved  soldiers  on  the  altar  of  war 
could  scarcely  hesitate  to  let  women  and  aged  people  suffer, 
provided  the  suffering  pressed  with  equal  or  greater  weight 
on  his  enemy. 

In  spite  of  Canning's  sarcastic  notes  and  the  views  of  many 
writers,  England  suffered  to  some  extent  from  the  embargo, 
but  not  sufficiently  to  bring  about  the  repeal  of  the  offensive 
orders  in  council.  Many  writers  and  speakers  ridiculed  the 
measure.  Frank  Landon  Humphreys  wrote :  ' '  Europe  viewed 
the  act  with  sarcastic  amusement,  and  England  with  its  large 
commerce  in  every  part  of  the  world  did  not  perceptibly  feel 


1   Gibbiiis,  H.  de  B.,  Industry  in  England,  p.  382. 

70 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  71 

the  loss  of  the  American  market  for  its  goods.  "^  Likewise 
various  speakers  in  the  American  Congress  claimed  that  the 
embargo  had  failed.  In  the  Senate  on  November  21,  1808,  in 
supporting  a  resolution  for  the  repeal  of  the  embargo,  James 
Hillhouse  of  Connecticut  declared  that  it  had  exercised  no 
effect  on  France  and  little  or  no  effect  on  England.  Other 
markets,  he  claimed,  were  open  to  the  latter.  The  West  Indies, 
he  held,  would  turn  their  sugar  plantations  into  corn  fields  and 
we  could  not  regain  our  trade,  for  other  countries  produced 
cheaper;  in  South  America  where  cattle  had  formerly  been 
killed  only  for  their  hides  and  tallow,  he  argued,  beef  would 
now  be  used;  England  would,  he  insisted,  get  her  cotton  from 
the  East  Indies  and  Africa ;  by  her  control  of  the  sea,  he  said, 
all  needed  products  would  go  to  her,  then,  if  any  were  left 
perhaps  to  other  nations.  He  attempted  to  prove  by  past  his- 
tory that  Americans  would  continue  to  use  foreign  goods  and 
pointed  out  the  futility  of  thinking  that  the  embargo  laws 
could  be  enforced  over  fifteen  hundred  miles  of  sea  coast  and 
a  territory   bordering   on   Canada.^ 

On  February  14,  1809,  in  favoring  the  total  repeal  of  the 
embargo  in  the  Senate,  J.  A.  Bayard  of  Delaware  declared 
that  it  was  not  a  measure  against  France,  for  the  Emperor 
had  commended  it ;  and  he  never  approved  of  measures  which 
did  not  agree  with  his  designs.  The  object,  he  held,  as  gen- 
erally admitted  was  to  coerce  Great  Britain.  With  regard 
to  this  attempt  he  said: 

It  seems  now  to  be  admitted,  and  the  fact  is  too  evident  to  be  denied, 
that  the  embargo  has  failed  in  its  coercive  effect  upon  Britain.  The 
lack  of  bread,  cotton,  or  lumber,  has  neither  starved  her  subjects  nor 
excited  them  to  insurrection.  Some  gentlemen  have  shrewdness  enough 
to  discover  an  effect  in  an  English  price  current,  which  might,  to  be 
sure,  have  been  owing  to  the  embargo,  or  might  have  been  produced 
by  the  operation  on  the  market  of  some  private  speculations.  But  it 
has  enriched  Canada  and  has  taught  the  islands  their  policy  and  ability 
to  live  without  us.4 

On  January  2,  1808,  Timothy  Pickering  wrote  to  Rufus  King 
from  Washington: 


2  Life  and  Times  of  David  Humphreys,  SoldierStatesman-Poet,  p.  382 

3  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.  19,  pp.  20-24. 

4  Ibid.,  Vol.  19,  p.  404. 


72        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

■  Although  the  embargo  is  unquestionably  levelled  at  Britain,  and  she 
might  resent  it,  I  trust  she  will  not.  By  it  we  withdraw  from  the  field, 
where  alone  we  come  in  collision.  She  may  be  content  quietly  to  enjoy 
the  monopoly  of  commerce  which  we  voluntarily  abandon.  I  hope  she 
will  adopt  this  policy,  which,  to  me,  seems  evidently  the  best  for  her 
and  for  us.  I  believe  at  the  same  time,  it  would  disappoint  our  rulers, 
who  would  be  more  angry  with  the  British  Ministry  if  the  repeal  of  the 
law  should  be  required  not  by  them,  but  by  the  clamours  of  our  own 
suffering  citizens  refusing  any  denial. ^ 

On  the  other  hand,  some  writers  believed,  as  did  Jefferson 
and  his  entire  cabinet  at  the  start,  that  the  embargo  would 
bring  England  to  terms.  One  of  these,  T.  C.  Amory,  in  speak- 
ing of  the  effect  of  the  embargo  on  England,  said: 

England  suffered  in  other  ways  than  those  mentioned  by  Mr.  Madison 
from  the  embargo  [loss  of  naval  stores  and  food  stuffs].  Already  more 
than  one-half  of  the  sixty-one  million  pounds  of  cotton  consumed  in 
her  mills  were  of  American  production,  and  the  annual  balance  of  our 
trade  in  her  favor  amounted  to  eight  millions  sterling.  Our  markets 
were  important  to  her  manufactures,  our  ports  afforded  a  convenient 
shelter  for  her  fleets.  Moreover,  there  was  sensible  ground  for  appre- 
hension that,  under  its  continued  pressure,  distress  would  force  us  into 
a  French  alliance;  and,  if  not  very  formidable  by  ourselves,  we  should 
have  greatly  contributed  to  the  strength  of  Napoleon.  .  .  .6 

Studies  of  prices  in  England  during  this  period  show  that 
the  embargo  was  not  entirely  without  effect,  though  to  be 
sure,  these  variations  may  have  been  due  in  part  at  least  to 
such  influences  as  private  speculations,  hoarding,  fluctuations 
in  the  currency,  and  the  successes  or  failures  of  the  English 
arms.  Most  people,  nevertheless,  will  admit  that  a  limitation 
of  the  supply,  unless  accompanied  by  a  corresponding  decrease 
in  demand,  causes  an  increased  price.  According  to  John 
MacGregor  the  average  price  of  sperm  oil  per  ton  was  £93 
in  1807,  £111  in  1808,  and  £120  in  1809;  the  average  price  of 
common  oil  was,  for  the  same  years,  £29,  £41,  and  £48.^ 
Carolina  rice  of  a  certain  grade  advanced  from  32  to  96  per 
cent,  1807-1808 ;  Georgia  bowed  cotton-wool  more  than  doubled : 
and  Virginia  tobacco  of  a  certain  grade  advanced  from  200  to 


3  Life  and  Correspondence  of  Eufus  King,  Vol.  V,  p.  45. 

6  Life  of  James  SuUivan  with  Selections  from  His  Writings,  Vol.  II,  p.  258. 

7  The   Progress  of   the   Nation,   Vol.    II,   p.    609. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  73 

256  per  cent   in  value.     Further  advances  also  occurred  for 
most  grades  in  1809.* 

The  cotton  prices  of  November  and  December,  1808,  and 
January  and  February,  1809,  were  double  those  of  the  corres- 
ponding months  in  the  previous  years.  The  following  table 
indicates  the  prices: 


ISOT 

1808 

1809 

Bowed     Sea  Island 

Bowed 

Sea  Island 

Bowed        Sea  Island 

January 

16     -17d 

25.26%d 

13%-14d 

25%-29d 

31%-32d 

69d 

February 

16%-17y2 

25-28 

14     -16 

26%-29 

27     -28% 

57 

March 

17%-19 

27-29 

14%-15% 

27%-30 

25     -27 

48 

April 

17     -17% 

28-30 

15     -16 

27%-30 

18     -20 

33     -34 

May 

16%-17% 

27-28 

18     -19% 

28     -31% 

16     -16% 

27     -30 

June 

i6y2-i7% 

27-28 

181^-19 

27 

13%-15 

24%-27 

July 

17%-18 

26-27 

20%-22 

29     -36 

14%-15% 

25     -28% 

Auerust 

15     -16% 

26-27 

21     -22% 

36    -42 

161^-17 

27     -27% 

September 

141/2-16% 

24-26% 

24     -30 

36     -42 

16     -18 

24     -26 

October 

12%-15% 

24-27 

31     -33 

48 

18     -19 

28% 

November 

13     -14% 

24-26 

30     -31% 

52 

19     -21% 

28    -29% 

December 

13     -14 

24-26 

31     -32 

52     -60 

20%-22 

29     -30 

Liverpool  imported  143,756  bags  of  cotton  from  the  United 
States  in  1807 ;  25,426  in  1808 ;  and  130,581  in  1809.'' 

The  English  Labour  Department  in  1902  made  a  report  on 
wholesale  and  retail  prices  in  the  United  Kingdom  and  gave 
statistical  tables  for  a  series  of  years.  The  average  price  for 
the  imperial  quarter  of  wheat  in  1806  was  79s  4d. ;  in  1807, 
75s  4d. ;  in  1808,  81s.  4d. ;  in  1809,  97s.  4d. ;  in  1810,  106s.  5d. 
For  the  same  years  the  average  price  for  barley  was  38s.  8d. ; 
39s.  4d. ;  43s.  5d. ;  47s ;  and  48s.  Id. ;  for  oats  27s,  7d. ;  28s.  4d. ; 
33s.  4d. ;  31s.  5d. ;  and  28s.  7d." 

It  must  be  remembered,  of  course,  that  England  was  well- 
nigh  self-supporting  in  grain  at  this  time  and  that  she  held 
control  of  the  sea  and  could  carry  the  necessary  products  for 
herself  without  the  aid  of  the  United  States.  At  the  Royal 
Hospital  of  Greenwich,  a  280  pound  sack  of  wheat  flour  cost 
82s.3d.  in  1805 ;  69s.7y2d.  in  1806 ;  63s834d.  in  1807 ;  69s.l0i/2d. 


8  Tooke,  T.,  A  IJi.itory  of  Prices,  Vol.  II,  pp.  407,  409,  418. 

9  Daniels,  G.  W.,  has  the  best  account  of  this  trade  in  an  article  entitled  "American 
Cotton  Trade  with  Liverpool  Under  the  Embargo  and  Non  Intercourse  Acts."  This 
article  is  found  in  the  American  Historical  Review,  Vol.  XXI,  pp.  276-287.  The 
table  is  on  page  287. 

10  Labour  Department's  Report  on  Wholesale  and  Retail  Prices  in  the  United  King- 
dom in  1902,  ivith  Comparative  Statistical  Tables  for  a  Series  of  Tears,  p.  70. 


74        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

in  1808;  85s.li/2d.  in  1809;  and  88s.4d.  in  1810.^i  The  assize 
price  per  quartern  loaf  of  bread  in  the  city  of  London  was 
10i/4d.  October  27,  1807;  lid.  March  22,  1808;  Is.  June  21, 
1808;  Is.Si/od.  November  21,  1808;  Is.Si/od.  February  28,  1809; 
and  ls.li4d.  June  6,  1809.  The  latter  was  the  lowest  price  reached 
during  the  year.  The  highest  price  during  1807,  1808,  and 
1809  was  set  on  October  3,  1809  at  Is.Sd.^^ 

It  will  thus  be  observed  that  the  price  increased  after  the 
embargo  was  passed  and  enforced,  and  that  soon  after  its 
repeal  the  low  point  of  the  year  was  reached.  Many  of  the 
sugar  importations  had  been  carried  by  American  ships,  but 
England  with  her  control  of  the  sea  could  supply  the  need; 
hence  the  price  of  sugar  was  not  affected  to  a  great  extent. 
Nevertheless,  the  price  did  increase  a  little,  1807-1809.  Thus 
the  average  price  per  hundred  weight  of  unrefined  sugar, 
exclusive  of  the  duty,  was  51s.8d.  in  1805,  43s.9d.  in  1806, 
34s.ld  in  1807,  38s.8d.  in  1808,  46s.3d.  in  1809,  and  49s.ld.  in 
1810.^'  By  taking  the  prices  in  1782  as  the  standard  prices 
and  the  number  of  price  quotations  as  39,  Professor  Jevons 
gets  the  following  index  numbers :  1805—132 ;  1806—130 ;  1807— 
129 ;  1808—145 ;  1809—157 ;  1810—142.  The  low  point  for  the 
thirty  year  period,  1792-1821,  was  91  in  1816  after  the  wars 
and  restrictions  were  over.^* 

English  papers  and  magazines  admitted  scarcity,  showed 
high  prices,  and  in  some  cases  attributed  the  bad  conditions 
directly  to  the  embargo.  The  following  tables,  compiled  from 
the  Gentlema7i's  Magazine  and  Historical  Chronicle,  show 
variations  in  the  prices  of  articles  not  imported  directly  to 
any  great  extent  from  the  United  States: 

11  Ibid.,  p.  99. 

12  Ibid.,  p.  218. 

13  Ibid.,  p.  218. 

14  Ibid.,  p.  450. 


i 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  75 

Average  prices  for  England  and  Wales  by  which  exportation  and  bounty 


were   regulated 

Wheat 

Rye 

Barley       Oats 

Beans 

Peas 

Oatmeal         Time 

s.     d. 

s.     d. 

s.     d.       s.     d. 

s.     d. 

s.     d. 

s. 

d. 

69     3 

46     1 

38  10       29     2 

55  10 

74     6 

39 

9 

Jan.  16, 

'08 

81     8 

57  10 

44     7       37  11 

62     9 

69     6 

51 

11 

July  16, 

'08 

89     6 

60     1 

44     2       32     1 

64     8 

73  10 

47 

1 

Dec.  17, 

'08 

92     9 

64     6 

44     4       31     9 

60  10 

67     1 

48 

5 

Feb.  18, 

'09 

90     6 

61  10 

43     6       30     8 

58  10 

56     9 

50 

0 

May  20, 

'09 

88     1 

56     9 

42     5       29     1 

55     7 

56  11 

49 

5 

July  22, 

'09 

100     5 

61     0 

46     8       31     1 

58     0 

61     4 

51 

9 

Sept.  16, 

'09 

Flour  per  sack 

Fine 

Seconds           Time 

Sugar  per  cwl 

Time 

55-68S. 

55  to 

60s.     Jan.  25, 

'08        33s 

7d.  Week 

Bnding  Jan.  2C 

,  '0! 

66 

55  to 

60        July  26, 

'08        41 

OVa 

July  20, 

'08 

85 

75  to 

80        Dec.  24, 

'08        49 

8d. 

Dec.   21, 

'08 

85 

75  to 

80        Feb.  20, 

'09        49 

oy* 

Feb.   22, 

'09 

75  to  80 

70  to 

75        May  22, 

'09        38 

lOd. 

May  24, 

'09 

75 

65  to 

70        July  24, 

'09        40 

10% 

July  26,  ' 

09 

95  to  100 

90  to 

95        Sept.  25, 

'09      47 

7 

Sept.  20, 

'091 

By  keeping  in  mind  the  date  of  the  embargo  and  the  various 
supplemental  laws  to  enforce  it,  the  reader  will  notice  that 
prices  of  commodities  for  which  England  was  only  slightly 
dependent  on  the  United  States  rose  after  the  passage  of  the 
embargo  and  fell  with  its  repeal,  although,  to  be  sure,  non- 
intercourse  caused  a  further   rise   later   on. 

Good  crops  in  1808,  it  should  be  noted,  relieved  the  pressure 
of  the  embargo  in  England.  A  letter,  dated  at  Manchester, 
July  22,  and  addressed  to  an  American  read  in  part : 

In  regard  to  Agriculture,  we  never  had  a  more  luxuriant  season — 
Pasture  and  mowing  grass  in  abundance — the  crops  of  Grain  and  Potatoes 
promise  well,  and  notwithstanding  the  Embargo  in  the  United  States, 
Wheat  is  decreasing  in  price.  Potatoes  2/6  per  bushel  and  expected  to  be 
down  to  1/3.16 

Another  Manchester  letter  dated  October  4,  1808,  said: 

The  crops  are  very  abundant  in  everything.  Oatmeal,  the  last  fort- 
night, has  fallen  from  58  shillings  per  load  (of  240  lbs.)  to  47  shillings. 
Flour  is  55  shillings  per  load  (of  240  lbs.  equal  to  wheat  at  12)  pet 
Winchester  bushel.  Potatoes  have  got  down  very  low,  the  last  three, 
weeks;  they  have  sold  at  fifteen  pence  the  Winchester  bushel,  for  the 


15  The    Gentleman's   Magazine:    and   Historical    Chronicle,   for    1808    and    1809,    Voi. 
78;   pp.  95,  663,   1135;   and  Vol.  79;   pp.  191,  487,  687,   895. 

16  Boston    Gazette,    September   22,    1808. 


76        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

common,  and  eighteen  pence  (equal  to  33  cts.)  for  the  better  sort.     The 
crops  of  hay  have  been  very  abundant  and  well  got  in.i7 

If,  however,  in  spite  of  good  crops,  those  commodities  for 
which  England  was  only  slightly  dependent  upon  the  United 
States  varied  to  some  extent,  what  may  be  expected  with  regard 
to  such  articles  as  tobacco  and  cotton?  Pinckney's  letter  of 
September  21,  1808,  to  Madison  already  alluded  to  pointed  out 
some  of  these  effects  but  more  will  be  given  now.  During  the  early 
months  of  1809  John  Trumbull  wrote  several  letters  to  Rufus 
King.  In  these  letters  he  discussed  economic  conditions  in 
England.  Since  he  was  opposed  to  the  embargo,  rather  free 
quotations  will  be  made  from  his  letters.  On  January  8,  1809, 
he  wrote  from  Falmouth : 

I  am  informed  by  Mr.  Fox  here,  that  the  price  of  corn  has  been  fall- 
ing for  some  weeks  past,  and  not  the  least  apprehension  of  scarcity  is 
now  entertained;  since  threshing  commenced,  the  crop  proves  to  have 
been  much  less  damaged  than  was  at  one  time  apprehended.  The 
quartern  loaf  (4  lbs.  &  5  oz.)   now  sells  at  a  shilling. 

The  price  of  Hemp  is  enormous,  £170  the  ton,  but  Government  have 
large  supplies  in  store;  considerable  quantities  have  found  their  way 
from  Eussia  thro'  the  means  of  neutrals,  &  the  India  Company  have 
contracted  to  furnish  1000  Tons,  the  arrival  of  part  of  which  is  soon 
expected.  Tallow,  (a  Eussian  article)  has  been  very  high,  but  is  fall- 
ing rapidly  in  consequence  of  importations  from  Brazil.  Cotton  is  also 
rather  falling  in  value  in  consequence  of  some  arrived  &  large  quantities 
expected  from  Brazil  and  India.  Pilchards,  of  which  immense  quantities 
are  annually  caught  on  this  coast,  and  usually  sent  to  the  Mediterranean, 
are  now  shipping  for  the  West  Indies.  .  .  .is 

On  February  12,  1809,  Trumbull  wrote  to  King  from  Lon- 
don.    He  said,  in  part: 

You  will  judge  of  the  danger  to  which  this  country  is  exposed  from 
the  want  of  corn  by  the  following  returns  of  the  Corn  Exchange: 

Nov.     26th,  1808,  Wheat,  75/  to  90/.     Flour,  75  to  80/. 

Feby.     6th,  1809,  Wheat,  75/  to  90/.     Flour,  75  to  85/. 

Several  cargoes  of  Cotton  have  arrived  within  these  few  days  from 
America  and  some  Tobacco,  in  defiance  of  the  Gunboats.  Hemp,  Timber, 
&  Flaxseed  are  very  dear.  Shipments  of  British  Manufactures  are  mak- 
ing at  Liverpool  for  America  almost  equal  in  extent  to  what  is  done  in 
common  times. 


I 


17  Ibid.,   December    19,    1808. 

18  Life  and  Correspondence  of  Rufus  King,  Vol.  V,  p.  124. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  77 

27th  Feby. — Numerous  Cargoes  of  Cotton  &  Tobacco  have  lately  ar- 
rived from  the  U.  S.,  principally  consigned  to  Baring  &  said  to  be  owned 
by  them.  These  arrivals  have  essentially  affected  the  price  of  Cotton, 
which  is  now  dull.i9 

On  April  5,  1809,  Trumbull  again  wrote  to  King  from  Lon- 
don, in  part  as  follows: 

The  price  of  Corn  and  Flour  is  gradually  falling,  Cotton  is  at  /18  d.  a 
pound;  Tobacco  at  /9  d. ;  Flaxseed  fallen  from  £20  to£5,  and  the  country 
generally  in  prosperity.  .  .  Farmers  on  old  leases  grow  rich,  and  as  leases 
fall  in,  the  Rents  are  generally  raised  by  the  offers  of  the  farmers  them- 
selves from  50  to  100  p.  ct.  Thus  the  proprietor  of  the  soil  becomes 
much  richer  than  he  was,  and  the  farmer  is  of  course  satisfied. 

The  Eesult  of  our  Supernatural  Wisdom  will  be  to  satisfy,  first  the 
World  and  finally  ourselves,  that  the  importance  of  America  in  the  scale 
of  Nations  has  been  very  much  over  rated — and  when  our  national  vanity 
is  a  little  lowered,  we  shall  certainly  be  a  more  estimable  people — thus 
things  work  together  for  good.20 

Trumbull's  sarcastic  comments  were,  no  doubt,  due  in  part, 
to  the  effect  of  the  embargo  on  his  pocket  book,  but  even  his 
statements  show  that  the  embargo  and  Napoleon's  scheme,  of 
which  many  Federalists  believed  the  embargo  to  be  a  part, 
did  affect  prices  and  economic  conditions  in  England.  This 
was  particularly  true,  as  Trumbull  intimated,  of  hemp,  tallow, 
flaxseed,  tobacco,  and  cotton.  Possibly  the  limitation  in  the 
supply  of  the  latter  was  the  greatest  effect  produced  in  Eng- 
land by  the  embargo.  Nevertheless,  even  English  writers 
admitted  that  the  prices  of  goods  which  Great  Britain  obtained 
from  the  United  States  went  up  when  the  embargo  was  passed 
and  fell  when  it  was  repealed.  Such  a  statement  needs  no 
confirmation,  but  one  quotation  appearing  in  a  London  maga- 
zine of  June,  1809  will  be  given : 

Upwards  of  seventy  American  vessels  have  entered  different  British 
ports  during  the  last  week,  with  cargoes  so  very  large  as  to  occasion  an 
almost  instantaneous  reduction  in  the  price  of  flour,  cotton,  tobacco, 
rice,  staves,  pitch,  turpentine,  etc.  A  description  of  cotton,  called  bowed 
Georgias,  which  sold  at  3s.  during  the  embargo,  is  now  so  low  as  Is.  2d., 
and  was  expected  to  have  a  further  depression  in  the  course  of  a  few 
days.2i 


19  Ibid.,  p.  144. 

20  Ibid.,  p.  150. 

21  The  Gentleman's  Magazine:  and  Historical  Chronicle,  Vol.  79,  p.  572. 


78        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

The  exact  cost  of  the  embargo  to  England  can  not  be  defi- 
nitely known.  According  to  an  exaggerated  statement  in  the 
National  Intelligencer  of  May  1,  1809,  the  embargo  advanced 
the  price  of  flour  from  $7.50  per  barrel  to  $15,  increased  the 
price  paid  for  other  provisions  and  raw  materials,  and  lessened 
manufactures.  Estimating  the  advanced  price  paid  for  pro- 
visions at  $15  for  each  of  six  million  people,  (the  total  popu- 
lation was  fourteen  million)  the  loss  occasioned  England  on 
foodstuffs  alone,  it  was  claimed,  amounted  to  ninety  million 
dollars. 

The  movement  of  goods  from  American  ports  decreased  from 
$108,343,150  in  1807  to  $22,430,960  in  1808,  or  more  than  79 
per  cent.  The  exports  to  Great  Britain  fell  from  $31,015,623 
in  1807  to  $5,183,297  in  1808,  or  more  than  83  per  cent.^- 
The  value  of  the  imports  into  the  United  States  in  1807  was 
$138,500,000  but  only  $56,990,000  in  1808,  or  a  decrease  of 
over  58  per  cent;  the  dutied  imports  from  England  fell  from 
$38,901,838  in  1807  to  $18,818,882  in  1808  or  about  52  per 
cent.-^  Thus,  it  will  be  noticed  that  in  spite  of  the  prohibition 
of  importation  of  fine  goods  by  Nicholson's  act,^*  the  import 
trade  decreased  less  than  the  export  and  the  English  trade 
decreased  less  than  the  general  import  trade.  Many  of  the 
articles  imported  into  the  United  States  were  just  as  regularly 
re-exported  to  the  West  Indies,  perhaps  to  the  amount  of  ten 
or  fifteen  million  dollars  worth  each  year,  a  sum  practically 
equivalent  to  the  value  of  the  goods  imported  duty  free  from 
England.  This  trade  was  now  naturally  thrown  back  into 
English  hands. 

According    to    Henry    Adams,    the    best    authority    on    this 

22  MacGregor,  John,  The  Progress  of  the  Nation,  Vol.  II,  pp.  881-883.  These  ex- 
ports were  in  the  last  three  months  of  1807,  as  Gallatin  points  out,  for  the  sub- 
sequent exportations  were  forbidden  by  the  embargo  (Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.  19, 
p.   913). 

23  Pitkin,  T.,  Statistical  View,  p.  202. 

24  See  United  States  Statutes  at  Large,  Vol.  II,  p.  469.  The  act  of  February  27, 
1808  was  supplementary  to  the  act  of  April  18,  1806  {Statutes  at  Large,  Vol.  II, 
pp.  379-381).  The  act  of  1808  prohibited  the  importation  of  all  articles  manufac- 
tured "entirely  of  silk  and  wool,  or  of  silk  and  flax,  or  of  flax  and  wool;  floor 
cloths ;  woolen  cassimeres,  carpets,  carpeting  and  mats,  whose  invoice  price  shall  ex- 
ceed five  shillings  sterling  per  square  yard."  Both  of  these  acts  were  repealed  by 
the  act  of  March  1,  1809  (United  States  Statutes  at  Large,  Vol.  II,  Sec.  17,  Page 
532). 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  79 

period,  the  true  consumption  of  the  United  States  was  not  over 
thirty-five  million  dollars,  and  the  loss  of  this  trade  was  partly 
offset  to  England  by  gain  in  freights,  recovery  of  seamen,  and 
by  smuggling.  Napoleon's  decrees  reduced  the  purchasing 
power  to  the  extent  of  perhaps  ten  million  dollars.  If  the 
British  merchants  made  a  profit  of  twenty  per  cent  on  the 
American  trade,  their  loss  was  not  over  five  million  dollars. 
This  sum,  of  course,  was  not  vital  when  England's  expenditures 
amounted  to  three  hundred  and  fifty  million  dollars  a  year 
and  her  export  trade  to  almost  two  hundred  million  dollars. 
Moreover,  notwithstanding  the  embargo  and  non-importation 
law,  the  exports  of  Great  Britain  were  worth  two  million  dol- 
lars more  in  1808  than  in  1807.^^ 

Evidently  new  markets  were  opened.  As  previously  stated, 
England  began  to  increase  her  trade  with  other  parts  of  the 
world  as  Africa,  India,  the  East  Indies,  and  South  America, 
especially  Brazil.  In  October,  1807,  Napoleon  ordered  the 
Portuguese  government  to  make  war  on  England  and  confiscate 
all  English  property.  When  that  government  refused  to  obey 
the  second  part  of  the  order,  the  dictator  ordered  General 
Junot  to  invade  Portugal  and  take  charge  of  affairs.  There- 
upon the  members  of  the  royal  Portuguese  family  sailed 
for  their  Brazilian  empire.  Naturally  numerous  articles  were 
now  imported  to  Brazil  from  England  and  increasing  exports 
went  to  England   from  Brazil. 

Moreover,  the  Spanish  revolt  against  Napoleon,  Joseph,  and 
the  French  in  July,  1808,  threw  open  the  Spanish  South 
American  colonies  to   English  trade.^^ 

Thus  good  markets  and  high  prices  for  woolen  manufactures 
and  other  goods,  according  to  a  Manchester  letter  of  October  4. 
were  found  in  South  America.^^  A  man  in  London  wrote 
to  a  Savannah  merchant  concerning  the  developing  of  British 


25  History  of  the  United  States,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  328,  329.  Professor  L.  M.  Sears  in 
an  excellent  article  entitled  "British  Industry  and  the  American  Embargo"  in  the 
Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics,  November,  1919,  (page  108)  estimates  the  net 
loss  of  imports  from  Europe,  Africa,  and  America,  as  £1,668,633  and  the  net  loss 
in  all  exports  as  £405,276  out  of  a  total  of  £35,007,.'S01.  He  points  out  (page  110) 
also  the  disturbance  in  exchange  occasioned  by  the  embargo  and  quotes  gold  as 
eighty  shillings  per  ounce  in   1807   and   ninety-one  shillings  in   1808. 

26  Robinson  and  Beard,  Development  of  Modern  Europe,  Vol.  I,  pp.  328,  329. 

27  Boston   Gazette,   December   19,   1S08. 


80        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

trade  in  South  America  and  the  losses  of  the  United  States 
under  date  of  October  7,  1808,  in  part  as  follows: 

We  see  a  number  of  British  ships  going  out  to  Charleston  and  your 
place,  in  expectation  no  doubt  of  getting  cotton  in  East  Florida,  which 
will  pay  them  well,  for  it  is  getting  in  great  demand  here,  notwithstand- 
ing the  market  is  daily  fed  by  arrivals  from  the  Brazils,  in  very  con- 
siderable quantities — those  fortunate  adventurers,  who  sent  out  cargoes 
of  Dry  Goods  to  the  Brazils,  have  returned  with  Rice  and  Cotton,  and 
cleared  upwards  of  100  per  cent  profit.  It  grieves  us  to  see  the  Brazil 
rice  coming  in  and  some  of  it  very  fine,  fetching  44  shillings  per  cwt. — 
cost  5  shillings  there.  Good  God!  What  is  the  Embargo  for,  but  to 
throw  the  United  States  back  50  years,  and  divert  all  their  trade  to  other 
channels.  It  is  folly  to  talk  of  the  freedom  of  the  seas  to  a  country, 
who  has  nearly  destroyed  the  navies  of  the  world,  and  got  almost  all 
the  remainder  into  her  possession — you  think  the  embargo  will  be  off 
in  November.  We  think  not,  and  that  it  will  continue  until  a  General 
Peace.  Sea- Island  Cotton,  3s.  6d.  to  4s.  6d.  per  lb.,  upland  3s.;  Rice, 
40  to  45s.  per  cwt.28 

The  opening  of  these  new  markets  naturally  did  much  to 
offset  English  losses  from  the  American  embargo.  In  fact, 
Professor  Channing,  a  gifted  student  of  this  period,  goes 
so  far  as  to  say:  "It  fell  out  in  this  way,  therefore,  that  the 
embargo  proved  to  be  a  positive  benefit  to  British  shipowners 
and  exporters.  "^^  Professor  Channing,  however,  probably  goes 
too  far,  at  least  if  the  Edinburgh  Review,  July,  1809,  is  to  be 
trusted  in  its  remarks  on  British  salvation: 

We  allude  to  the  opening  of  Spain  and  Portugal,  and  our  military  ex- 
peditions in  these  countries — the  struggle  made  by  Sweden,  and  the  in- 
creased communication  with  Brazil  and  Spanish  America — not  to  mention 
the  fact  that  the  year  which  gives  this  amount  of  loss  comprehends  the 
period  when  shipments  were  made  on  both  sides,  before  the  operation 
of  the  embargo,  and  when  hazards  were  run  by  neutral  adventurers 
upon  the  presumption  that  neither  of  the  regulations  would  be  enforced 
as  they  actually  were.  Had  it  not  been  for  these  circumstances,  our 
loss  of  trade  in  consequence  of  the  Orders  would  probably  have  been 
more  than  double  what  it  actually  was;  and  this  boasted  "cure"  for  our 
commercial  embarrassments  would  in  all   probability,  have   reduced  our 

28  Paulson's  American  Daily  Advertiser,  January  13,   1809. 

29  The  Jeffersonian  Syslem,  pp.  228,   229. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  81 

whole    foreign  trade   to    a   little   wretched    smuggling    in   Europe    and 
America.30 

It  must  not  be  supposed  that  the  embargo  rested  lightly 
or  profitably  on  all  classes  of  English  society.  The  farmers 
and  merchants  who  profited  from  high  prices  and  profiteering 
wei'e  near  to  official  England  and  could  loudly  voice  their 
satisfaction.  On  the  other  hand,  the  poor  factory  workers 
had  no  representation.  If  they  rioted  because  of  the  high  cost 
of  living,  low^  wages,  or  the  closing  of  shops  incident  to  the 
loss  of  American  cotton,  they  were  put  down  with  cruelty 
and  their  complaints  were  scarcely  given  a  hearing.  They 
were  unorganized,  without  political  rights,  and  had  few  de- 
fenders; hence  they  were  obliged  to  suffer.  Many  did  suffer, 
as  the  increasing  sum  used  for  poor  relief  showed.  In  1803 
and  1804  the  average  sum  expended  was  £4,268,000;  in  1811. 
it  was  £5,923,000;  in  1813-1815  when  the  restrictions  and  war 
had  produced  their  full  effect,  the  poor  rates  averaged 
£6,130,000.'^  The  brief  summary  by  Henry  Adams  is  worth 
quoting  in  entirety: 

Probably  at  least  five  thousand  families  of  workingmen  were  reduced 
to  pauperism  by  the  embargo  and  the  decrees  of  Napoleon;  but  these 
.sufferers,  who  possessed  not  a  vote  among  them  and  had  been  in  no 
way  party  to  the  acts  of  either  government  were  the  only  real  friends 
Jefferson  could  hope  to  find  among  the  people  of  England;  and  his  em- 
bargo ground  them  in  the  dust  in  order  to  fatten  the  squires  and  .ship 
owners  who  had  devised  the  Orders  in  Council.  If  the  English  laborers 
rioted,  they  were  shot;  if  the  West  Indian  slaves  could  not  be  fed,  they 
died.  The  embargo  served  only  to  lower  the  wages  and  the  moral 
standard  of  the  laboring  classes  throughout  the  British  empire,  and  to 
prove  their  helplessness. 3- 

The  effect  of  the  embargo  on  Engli.sh  manufactures  was 
undoubtedly  harmful.  The  merchants  and  manufacturers  of 
Liverpool  petitioned  Parliament  for  the  repeal  of  the  orders 
in  council.  One  of  the  arguments  used  was  that  the  United 
States  norm-ally  bought  over  ten  million  pounds  worth  of 
English   manufactures,   but   that    she   could   not   continue   this 


30  Quoted     by    Sears,     L.    M.,     in    "British    Industry     and   the   American     Embargo' 
{Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics,  November,   1919,  pp.   Ill,   112). 

31  Adams,  Henry,  History  of  the   Vnited  States,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  329,  330. 
o2  Ibid.,   p.   330. 


82        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

Avhen  her  markets  were  closed.  In  a  discussion  in  the  House 
of  Commons  on  March  7,  it  was  stated  that  there  was  only 
sufficient  silk  in  the  country  to  last  for  six  weeks  and  that 
probably  sixty  thousand  industrial  workers  would  be  thrown 
out  of  employment  in  a  short  time.  It  was  claimed,  moreover, 
that  the  usual  importation  of  flax  seed  amounted  to  sixty 
thousand  hogsheads  and  that  only  ten  thousand  had  been  re- 
ceived. A  number  of  merchants  of  London  presented  a  peti- 
tion to  Parliament  asking  to  be  heard  by  counsel  against  the 
British  orders.  The  request  was  rejected  by  a  vote  of  99 
to  66.33 

Petitions  for  the  repeal  of  the  orders  continued.  Nearlj'- 
two  hundred  thousand  English  subjects  protested  against  the 
"Orders  of  Council  aimed  at  our  Commerce."  Many  feared  a 
revolt  in  the  West  Indies  as  well  as  disturbances  in  England.^* 

As  time  passed,  however,  new  outlets  were  found  for  manu- 
factured goods,  new  sources  of  raw  material  obtained,  violations 
of  the  embargo  increased,  and  adjustments  to  new  conditions 
occurred.  Of  course,  allowance  must  always  be  made  for  the 
editorial  views  of  newspapers.  Keeping  this  in  mind,  we  may 
quote  from  a  letter  written  July  22  by  a  Manchester  gentleman. 
It  reads,  in  part:  "Our  trade  is  very  good — we  have  as  many 
orders  as  we  can  execute — of  course  the  Weavers  are  fully 
employed  and  contented.  .  ."^s 

Another  Manchester  letter  dated  October  4,  1808  referred 
to  the  fortunate  effect  of  Napoleon's  decrees  in  causing  an 
assignment  of  cotton  yarn  consigned  to  Hamburg  to  be  re- 
turned, and  emphasized  the  beneficial  effects  of  the  good 
markets  and  high  prices  for  manufactured  goods  in  Soutli 
America.3^  Brazilian  cotton  increased  rapidly  at  the  expense  of 
the  American.3^ 

Administration  newspapers,  to  be  sure,  did  not  agree  with 
the  decreasing  pressure  of  the  embargo.     Thus  one  quotes  a 

33  National  Intelligencer,  April  25  and  29,  1808. 

34  Wilmington  Gazette,  June  7,   1808. 

35  Boston  Gazette,  September  22,  1808. 
38  Ihid.,  December  19,   1808. 

37  IMd.,  December  22,  1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  83 

Liverpool    letter   dated   January    1,    1809,    which   declared   in 
part : 

Your  embargo  is  severely  felt  here.  We  shall  be  deprived  of  Bread 
during  the  present  winter.  All  our  flour  has  been  consumed,  and  we 
have  no  hopes  of  receiving  a  supply.  The  people  have  attributed  their 
distress  to  the  British  government.  They  are  satisfied  that  the  measures 
of  your  government  are  in  support  of  your  just  rights,  and  there  are 
hundreds  here  ready  to  emigrate  to  the  United  States  if  they  possessed 
the  means.38 

Again,  we  read  the  following  item  dated  New  York,  April  18 : 
Our  letters  from  Liverpool,  to  March  1st,  state,  that  notwithstanding 
the  supplies  recently  received,  all  articles  of  American  produce  bore 
very  high  prices.  Some  cottons  were  rated  at  a  dollar  and  a  quarter 
per  lb.  The  common  cottons  at  about  57  cents.  Flour,  March  1st,  was 
at  12%  dollars  the  American  barrel.  There  is  no  part  in  England  in 
which  the  American  embargo  is  so  severely  felt  as  in  Liverpool. 39 

The  same  paper,  two  days  later,  recounted  the  fulfilled 
prophecies  with  regard  to  the  embargo's  effect  on  England: 

1.  Diminished  manufactures. 

2.  Lessened  trade. 

3.  Decreased  taxes  from  imports. 

4.  Lack  of  naval  supplies. 

5.  Harmful  effects  on  colonies. 

The  immediate  result,  the  Intelligencer  contended,  was  the 
demand  for  repeal.  The  Spanish  Revolution  prevented  the 
full  effects,  it  admitted,  but  nevertheless  it  declared:  "We 
repeat  it,  then,  the  revocation  of  the  British  Orders  is  strictly 
attributable  to  the  Embargo."*" 

Though  this  view  seems  to  be  erroneous,  an  English  op])osi- 
tion  paper  declared: 

As  far  as  Ministers  have  it  remaining  in  their  power,  they  have  en- 
deavored to  retrace  their  steps  towards  America.  Necessity  has  com- 
pelled them  to  attempt  what  pride  absolutely  forbid;  and  in  order  to 
preserve  the  shattered  remains  of  our  comnircc  with  the  United  States, 
they  have  so  now-modelled  and  altered  the  Orders  in  Council,  as  that  the 
measure  amounts  to  a  revocation  of  them  with  regard  to  America;  and 
we  hope  it  has  not  been  done  too  late  to  be  attended  with  very  beneficial 
consequence.4i 


38  Baltimore  Evening  Post,  January  30,  1809. 

39  National  Intelligencer,  April  24,   1809. 

40  Ihid.,  April  26,   1809. 

41  Independent    Whiij,  5I;iy   7,    1809. 


84        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

One  point — the  effect  of  the  embargo  on  the  West  Indies — 
deserves  more  attention  than  is  usually  given  to  it.  Earlier 
tables  given  in  Chapter  I  show  the  prosperous  commerce  of 
the  United  States  with  those  islands;  later  tables  in  Chapter  IX 
will  show  how  this  trade  was  specifically  affected.  Here  it 
merely  remains  to  point  out  that  since  those  islands  were 
largely  dependent  upon  the  United  States  for  foodstuffs,  the 
embargo  measure  caused  intense  suffering  by  running  prices 
to  a  famine  height.  Even  the  English  West  Indies  suffered, 
for  England  had  her  hands  full  in  Europe.  English  writers 
admitted  this:  hence  they  hailed  with  delight  the  renewed  trade 
with  Spain.     One  of  these  writers  declared  in  October,  1808 : 

Letters  from  Jamaica  and  Demerara  speak  of  the  renewed  and  active 
intercourse  between  our  settlements  and  those  of  Spain;  and  that  the 
scarcity  which  began  to  be  felt  in  some  of  our  Islands  in  consequence 
of  the  embargo  in  America,  had  been  removed,  by  prompt  and  abundant 
supplies  from  our  new  allies.42 

Naturally,  far  stronger  claims  concerning  the  effects  of  the 
embargo  on  England,  France,  and  the  West  Indies  were  made 
in  the  debates  in  the  United  States  Congress  and  in  the  admin- 
istration newspapers  than  were  likely  to  be  admitted  by 
Eui'opean  writers.  Nevertheless,  these  statements  were  dis- 
puted by  the  enemies  of  the  embargo.  On  April  14,  1808, 
D.  R.  Williams  of  South  Carolina  spoke  in  the  House  in  favor 
of  the  retention  of  the  embargo.  He  contended  that  the  prices 
of  England's  imports,  on  cotton,  tobacco,  lumber,  wheat,  flour, 
rice,  pot  and  pearl  ashes,  tar,  pitch,  flaxseed,  hemp,  and  hides 
were  raised,  due  to  the  embargo,  for  £9,615,161  worth  of  her 
imports  came  from  the  United  States.  The  loss  of  the  Ameri- 
can cotton  alone,  he  held,  was  a  heavy  blow  to  England,  He 
maintained,  moreover,  that  most  of  England's  imported  flour 
— ninety  thousand  barrels  at  Liverpool  alone — came  from  the 
United  States.  He  insisted  also  that  Great  Britain  needed 
American  shipping  for  her  West  India  trade.*^  In  addition, 
he  argued  that  the  embargo  was  impartial,  and  hence  deserved 


42  Gentleman's  Magazine:   and  Historical  Chronicle,  Vol.   78,   pp.  938,   939. 

43  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.  18,  pp.  2130-2132.  According  to  Sear.s,  L.  M.,  in  an 
article  previously  quoted,  the  embargo  diminished  British  corn,  grain,  and  meal  im- 
ports from  £920,435  in  1807  to  £146,119  in  1808  (Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics, 
November,   1919,  p.   105). 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  85 

support  on  that  ground,  for  it  affected  the  French  and  Spanish 
West  Indies.    The  French  marine,  he  declared,  was  annihilated. 

How,  [he  asked,]  can  she  supply  her  West  Indies  with  subsistence? 
How  can  France  be  supplied  with  the  product  of  her  West  Indies,  coffee 
and  sugar,  or  with  the  product  of  the  East?  Nowhere,  but  through 
American  bottoms;  they  must  starve  if  you  have  resolution  enough  to 
hold  on  to  the  embargo.** 

On  April  19,  1808,  John  Randolph  of  Roanoke,  who  was  then 
opposed  to  the  embargo,  referred  to  the  excessive  smuggling 
carried  on,  whereby  flour  was  supplied  to  the  "West  Indies. 
"Every  arrival  from  the  West  Indies,"  he  insisted,  ''tells  you 
of  the  cargoes  of  flour  carried  in,  until  it  becomes  a  point  of 
honor  not  to  tell  of  one  another."*-'  On  November  28,  1808, 
Edward  St.  Loe  Livermore  of  Massachusetts,  also  an  opponent 
of  the  embargo,  declared,  in  referring  to  the  effect  on  the 
West  Indies,  ''With  all  the  energy  with  which  this  wise 
measure  has  been  armed  by  your  countless  embargo  laws,  I 
have  not  heard  of  a  single  poor  West  India  negro  being  starved 
by  it."*« 

Two  days  later,  November  30,  R.  M.  Johnson  of  Kentucky, 
a  friend  of  the  embargo,  declared  that  the  people  of  the  West 
Indies  could  not  live  without  supplies  from  the  United  States, 
and  that  flour  there  had  already  sold  for  twenty  to  sixty 
dollars  a  barrel.  Taking  up  the  trade  of  the  United  States 
with  Great  Britain,  he  declared  that  the  latter  was  deprived 
of  four  million  pounds  worth  of  tobacco,  cotton,  and  the  sub- 
stantials  'of  life.  He  insisted  that  we  bought  twelve  million 
pounds  worth  of  English  manufactured  goods  and  got  money 
by  the  European  trade  to  settle  a  balance  of  eight  million 
pounds.  This  trade,  he  reiterated  in  common  with  the  other 
friends  of  the  embargo,  was  interrupted  not  by  the  embargo, 
but  by  the  English  orders  in  council  which  had  given  rise  to 
it.  He  declared  that  when  weavers  and  tailors,  by  hundreds 
and  thousands,  had  assembled  to  protest  against  tlie  orders 
in  council  in  a  peaceable  sort  of  way  "they  were  welcomed 
home  to  see  their  families  starve  by  the  sound  of  the  cannon, 


;  44  Annals  of  Conffress,  Vol.  18,  p.  2132. 

I  4.'5   Ibid.,  p.   2240. 

I  46   Ibid.,  Vol.   19,  p.   552. 


86        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

and  some  of  them  killed."  He  tried  to  ridicule  Canning's 
sarcastic  comment  on  the  embargo,  "as  a  measure  of  incon- 
venient restriction  upon  the  American  citizens,"  by  referring 
to  the  proclamation  inviting  and  encouraging  Americans  to 
violate  the  embargo.*''     Said  he: 

The  arms  of  His  Britannic  Majesty  opened  to  receive  smugglers:  Come 
in,  all  ye  heavy-laden  with  provisions,  and  I  will  give  you  rest!  Whether 
you  have  papers  or  not,  you  shall  not  be  molested.  Thus,  protection  is 
offered  to  the  smuggler,  whilst  the  bona  fide  merchant  must  be  driven  from 
the  ocean  or  fall  a  sacrifice  to  the  Orders  in  Council. *§ 

In  the  Senate,  on  December  21,  James  Hillhouse  of  Connecti- 
cut, in  opposing  the  embargo,  cited  numerous  instances  of  viola- 
tion. He  quoted  from  a  Captain  Scovel,  who  arrived  in  New 
York  on  December  12  from  St.  Pierre,  Martinique,  and  Antigua 
to  show  that  vessels  arrived  there  daily  from  the  South,  es- 
pecially from  Virginia.  This  smuggling,  of  course,  helped 
supply  the  West  Indies  and  kept  the  price  of  food  down,  but, 
nevertheless,  while  Captain  Scovel  was  at  Martinique,  a  Vir- 
ginia pilot  boat  schooner  arrived  with  750  barrels  of  flour 
which  were  sold  at  thirty  dollars  a  barrel.  At  Antigua  in 
four  days  three  vessels  arrived  from  Virginia  with  full  cargoes 
of  flour.  At  St.  Kitts  he  saw  a  Virginia  schooner,  which  had 
partly  unloaded  a  cargo  of  flour  at  Barbados,  dispose  of  the 
remainder  at  a  better  price.*^ 

The  papers  of  the  period  contained  numerous  references  to 
prices  of  products  in  the  West  Indies.  Administration  news- 
papers generally  referred  to  high  prices;  anti-administration 
papers  passed  by  conditions,  or  at  least  did  not  emphasize 
them.  The  immediate  effect,  however,  was  to  cause  increases 
in  all  places  wholly  or  partially  dependent  on  American  prod- 
ucts. As  soon  as  news  of  the  embargo  reached  Havanna,  flour 
rose   from   twelve  to   twenty-five  dollars  per  barrel.     At   St. 


47  Ibid.,  pp.   587,   588. 

48  Ibid.,  p.  589. 

49  Ibid.,  p.  286.  According  to  John  Howe's  letter  of  June  7  to  Sir  George  Prevost, 
flour  had  sold  in  French  Guadeloupe  at  ninety  dollars  a  barrel,  and  could  with  dif- 
ficulty be  procured  at  that  price.  This  was,  however,  exceptional  (American  His- 
torical Review,  Vol.  XVII,  p.  90). 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  87 

Croix  it  rose  from  six  to  fourteen  dollars,  ''and  other  pro- 
visions in  proportion.  "^° 

It  will,  of  course,  be  impossible  to  refer  to  the  effect  of  the 
embargo  on  all  the  islands  off  the  southeastern  coast  of  the 
United  States,  but  a  few  will  be  mentioned.  It  must  be  noted 
that  at  times  prices  were  very  high,  but  that  a  large  import 
of  food  would  cause  reductions.  Prices  in  Jamaica  were  high 
on  March  30.  Flour  was  then  reported  at  twenty-five  dollars 
per  Ijarrel  in  Kingston,  forty  at  St.  Croix,  and  thirty-two  in 
Trinidad.^^ 

The  captain  of  the  schooner  West  Indian,  who  arrived  in 
Baltimore  September  10  from  Jamaica,  declared  that  the  em- 
bargo was  severely  felt  there,  that  flour  sold  for  forty-eight 
dollars  per  barrel,  cod  fish  for  thirty-nine  per  hundred  weight, 
and  every  article  of  necessity  at  a  proportionate  price.^^ 
Reports  in  the  early  winter  of  1808,  however,  indicated 
that  flour  was  retailing  at  eighteen  dollars  per  barrel,  the 
average  price  in  the  best  of  times,  and  that  lumber  was  plen- 
tiful. The  legislature  was  considering,  with  every  prospect  of 
passage,  a  bill  laying  an  import  duty  on  all  American  products. 
Concerning  this  the  writer  said : 

Thus  we  are  forced  to  the  humiliating  confession,  that  while  our  em- 
bargo is  oppressive  and  ruinous  to  our  own  citizens,  it  has  had  the 
effect  abroad  of  inducing  those  who  formerly  depended  on  us  for  numer- 
ous necessary  supplies,  to  resort  to  other  channels  for  support;  and  not 
only  this,  but  to  draw  from  them  a  law  subjecting  to  heavy  import 
duties,  those  very  articles  which  we  vainly  imagined  were  indispensable 
to  their  existence.53 

At  St.  Croix  flour  was  quoted  at  sixteen  dollars  per  barrel, 
beef  at  thirteen,  and  pork  at  twenty-six  earlj-  in  the  year.^* 
Towards  the  close  of  March,  however,  flour  had  advanced 
to  forty  dollars  per  barrel  and  beef  and  pork  were  also  high.-" 
In  May  flour  had  fallen  to  thirty-six  dollars  a  barrel.     Corn 


50  Northampton  Republican  Spy,  Februarj-  24,    1808. 

51  Miller's   Weekly   Messenger,   May   21,    1808. 

52  National  Intelligencer,    September   14,    1608. 

53  Relf's  Philadelphia  Gazette  and  Daily  Advertiser,  December  19,   1808. 

54  National  Intelligencer,  February  22,    1808. 

55  Miller's  Weekly  Messenger,  May  21.   1808. 


88        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

meal  was  one  hundred  dollars  a  hogshead."'*'  "We  are  at  pres- 
ent well  supplied  with  provisions,"  declared  a  St.  Croix  letter 
dated  September  10,  1808. 

There  are  from  6,000  to  7,000  bbls.  of  flour  here— price  $18  to  $20, 
beef  $20,  pork  $24,  and  no  sales.  We  have  also  some  lumber,  but  if  the 
embargo  continues  until  March,  this  article  will  be  high,  as  our  supplies 
from  Canada  and  Nova  Scotia  are  trifling — but  as  to  provisions,  we 
make  out  astonishingly  well.57 

A  letter  from  St.  Croix,  dated  December  1,  1808  read,  in 
part : 

We  are  all  in  anxiety  here  for  the  event  of  your  embargo.  If  con- 
tinued, it  will  be  ruinous  to  this,  as  well  as  to  every  other  island  depend- 
ing on  you  for  lumber.  One-third  of  the  estates  have  not  materials  in 
the  lumber  way.  I  am  now  delivering  pitch  pine  scantling  to  be  con- 
verted into  staves.  I  hope  soon  to  see  the  American  colours  again  in 
our  harbour.     Prices  quoted,  viz: 

Flour  per  cargo,  21  to  22  dollars,  by  retail  25  to  30. 

Prime  Beef,  24  dollars. 

Pork  36  to  40. 

Candles,  8  bits  or  64  cents  per  Ib.ss 

An  unsigned  letter  from  Havana,  dated  August  23,  stated 
that  the  people  could  get  all  necessary  provisions  from  Vera 
Cruz,  Campeachy,  Spain,  and  England,  and  intimated  that 
the  Cuban  ports  would  probably  be  forever  closed  against  the 
United  States  if  the  embargo  were  not  repealed  within  two 
months. -^^  But  a  Charleston  item  dated  October  14  read:  "Flour 
is  very  scarce  at  Havanna,  there  being  no  recent  arrivals  froni 
Vera  Cruz.  A  brig  from  Philadelphia  for  New  Orleans,  was 
sent  into  Havanna  about  three  weeks  since,  with  300  barrels  of 
flour,  which  sold  for  55  dollars  per  barrel."®" 

Early  in  the  fall  of  1808  flour  at  Guadaloupe  was  said  to 
be  down  to  eighteen  dollars  a  barrel  because  of  arrivals  from 
France.  Other  provisions,  nevertheless,  remained  high.®^ 
On  January  13,  1809  flour   was    quoted    at    sixty    dollars    per 

56  Wilmington   Gazette,  June   7,   1808. 

57  United  States  Gazette,  October  8,  1808. 

58  Richmond  Enquirer,  January  31,   1809. 

59  Boston  Gazette,   September  22,   1808. 

60  National  Intelligencer,  October   28,   1808. 

61  Ibid.,  November  4,   1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  89 

barrel  in  Surinam,  herrings  at  twenty,  salmon  at  forty-eight, 
mackerel  at  six,  salt  at  sixteen,  oil  at  three  dollars  per  gallon, 
tobacco  at  eighty  cents  per  pound,  rice  at  twenty-four,  cod 
fish  at  twenty,  pitch  and  tar  as  scarce,  and  lumber  as  unobtain- 
able. The  products  of  the  island  were  quoted :  molasses  sixteen 
cents,  sugar  five  dollars  per  hundred  weight,  cotton  sixty-two 
cents  per  pound,  coffee  at  twenty-eight  and  cocoa  as  scarce.®- 

A  letter  dated  Bermuda,  March  3,  1809,  declared  that  the 
embargo  was  severely  felt  in  that  island,  that  many  people 
were  without  bread,  that  corn  had  not  been  on  sale  for  a 
month  or  six  weeks,  and  that  flour  was  very  scarce  and  sell- 
ing at  (over  thirty  dollars  per  barrel.®^ 

A  letter  from  Barbados,  dated  June  9,  declared  in  part : 

Since  our  last  flour  has  declined  in  price,  in  consequence  of  the  im- 
portation by  the  fleet  being  very  considerable. 

We  have  plenty  of  salted  provisions  from  Ireland,  and  cheap,  and  an 
overstock  of  both  dry  and  pickled  fish  from  Halifax  and  Newfoundland. 

You  have  calculated  erroneously  in  America,  if  you  expect  to  starve 
the  British  Island  by  your  Embargo.  We  are  beginning  to  find  that  we 
are  perfectly  independent  of  your  supplies;  and  we  have  reason  to  think 
that  the  only  groat  sufferers  by  this  would-be  starving  system,  will  be 
yourselves.64 

Another  letter  from  the  Barbados,  dated  October  22,  declared 
that  there  was  a  glut  of  provisions  and  flour  in  those  islands. 
The  writer  insisted  that  there  were  seven  thousand  barrels  of 
flour  in  the  Barbados  market,  that  corn  was  selling  at  $1.50 
and  fish  at  $4.50,  and  that  the  price  of  West  India  produce 
was  rising.*^^ 

The  effect  of  the  embargo  on  the  territory  adjoining  the 
United  States  is  worthy  of  notice.  At  first  the  effect  on 
Florida  was  decidedly  harmful.  Thus  a  letter  from  a  Georgia 
gentleman    dated   March    14,    1808,    read: 

"The  embargo  has  had  its  effect  on  the  citizens  of  Mobile 
and  Pensacola.  They  are  almost  in  a  state  of  starvation.  Corn 
is  4  dollars  a  bushel ;  bacon  50  cents  per  lb. ;  lard  1  dollar 


62  Paulson's  American  Daily  Advertiser,  February  22,   1809. 

63  National  Intelliyencer,  March  3,   1809. 

64  Boston  Repcretory,  July  12,  1803. 

65  New  York  Herald,  December  17,   1808. 


90        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

per  quart;  fowls  9  dollars  per  doz.  ,  .'"'^  With  the  coming  of 
the  new  crops,  supplies  from  the  Spanish  territory,  and  increased 
smuggling,  however,  conditions  in  the  Floridas  improved. 

From  the  outset,  apparently,  Canada  prospered  at  the  ex- 
pense of  the  United  States.  A  letter  from  Quebec,  speaking 
of  the  beneficial  effects  of  the  embargo  concluded:  "God  grant 
that  your  Embargo  Law  may  continue  forever."®^  "Your  Em- 
bargo may  ruin  your  own  Merchants  and  many  others,"  wrote 
a  Halifax  gentleman  under  date  of  May  25,  "but  if  it  is  con- 
tinued, will  make  the  fortunes  of  the  traders  in  this  prov- 
ince. .  ."®^ 

"In  proportion  as  the  Northern  (or  Commercial)  States  suffer  by  Mr. 
Jefferson's  Embargo,"  declared  the  same  paper  a  little  later,  ''we  see 
Nova  Scotia  and  Canada  rising  into  wealth,  strength  and  importance; — 
and  every  paper  from  the  British  provinces  exhibits  numerous  clearances 
for  the  West  Indies  and  'Europe,  loaded  with  provisions  and  lumber  of  all 
kinds.  Before  the  Embargo  was  laid  we  were  the  exclusive  carriers  of 
those  articles; — and  it  would  then  have  been  considered  almost  as  great 
a  curiosity  to  see  clearances  of  the  above  kind,  from  British  ports,  as  it 
would  now  be  to  see  whales  spouting  in  Lake  Champlain.  .  ."so 

Canadian  merchants  also  profited  by  the  handling  of  goods 
intended  for  the  United  .States.  According  to  the  New  York 
Evening  Post  there  were  six  arrivals  at  Quebec  on  June  12 
from  London  and  Liverpool.  These  vessels  had  full  cargoes  of 
dry  goods.  "Before  the  embargo,"  declared  the  writer,  "such 
a  thing  was  hardly  known.  There  is  little  doubt  that  the  great- 
est part  of  these  goods  will  find  their  way  into  the  United 
States  without  adding  a  cent  to  our  revenue.  "^° 

An  article  in  a  Boston  paper  referred  to  the  prosperity  of 
Halifax  and  the  reported  talk  of  sending  Jefferson  fifty  or 
sixty  barrels  of  flour  with  the  request  that  he  remain  firm  in 
the  embargo.^^  A  Philadelphia  paper  declared  that  the  owners 
of  vessels  in  Halifax  and  St.  John  were  preparing  a  valuable 
piece  of  plate  to  present  to  President  Jefferson  as  soon  as  his 


06  Connecticut   Courant,  May  4,   1808. 

67  Philadelphia  Gazette  and  Daily  Advertiser,  May  12,  1808. 

68  Boston  Gazette,  June  16,   1808. 

69  Ibid.,  June  27,   1808. 

70  United  Slates  Gazette,  July  7,  1808. 

71  Reperetory,  June  24,   1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  91 

term  had  expired  in  acknowledgment  of  the  help  they  had 
received  from  the  American  embargo/- 

A  small  wave  of  emigration  set  in  from  the  northern  states 
to  Canada.  This  wave  passed  through  Buffalo  during  June, 
July,  and  August.  The  people,  hoping  to  escape  the  embargo 
calamities,  went  by  families  in  wagons  and  carts.^^  A  letter 
from  Upper  Canada,  dated  February  1,  referred  to  the  larger 
number  of  emigrants,  especially  from  Pennsylvania.^* 

Immense  quantities  of  produce  were  shipped  from  Quebec 
during  July  and  August.  Over  one  hundred  and  fifty  vessels 
which  had  entered  the  St.  Lawrence  were  soon  to  be  dispatched 
with  full  cargoes.  The  Canadian  merchants  were  beginning 
to  believe  that  Canada  would  soon  be  a  powerful  rival  of  the 
United  States." 

The  papers  of  the  period  contain  frequent  reference  to  money 
leaving  the  United  States  by  the  hundred  thousand.  Said  a 
writer  from  Quebec,  November  28 :  ' '  The  immense  sums  of 
money  brought  into  circulation,  and  the  number  of  artificers, 
tradesmen  and  labourers  employed,  in  the  various  works  of 
utility  and  ornament,  at  present  going  forward  must  be  at- 
tended with   incalculable  benefit  to  the   province.  "^^ 

According  to  report,  one  observer  declared,  as  quoted  under 
a  Boston  date  of  January  14,  1809,  that  on  his  return  from 
Canada,  just  accomplished,  he  had  counted  seven  hundred 
sleighs  between  Montreal  and  ]Middlebury,  in  Vermont.  Those 
going  to  Canada  were  loaded  with  provisions,  potash,  etc.  '"We 
hope  those  returning,"  said  the  article,  *'were  bringing  back 
a  part  of  the  Five  Million  of  dollars,  which  have  found  their 
way  put  of  the  United  States  since  our  wretched  Embargo 
system  was  adopted.  "^^ 

The  embargo  stimulated  the  planting  of  wheat  in  Canada, 
led  to  the  erection  of  potash  works  in  large  number,  and 
encouraged  immigration.     "Many  more  United  States  citizens 


72  United  States  Gazette,  December  8,  1808. 

73  New  England  Palladium,   September  13,   180S. 

74  Paulson's  American  Daily  Advertiser,  February  27,  1809. 

75  United  States  Gazette,   September  14,   1808. 

76  New  England  Palladium,  December  23,   1808. 

77  Paulson's  American   Daily  Advertiser,  January  20,   1809. 


92        ICAVA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

would  come,"  said  a  Canadian  letter  of  February  1,  1909,  "but 
are  unwilling  to  dispose  of  their  property  at  the  reduced  price 
occasioned  by  the  Embargo;  and  here  we  can  perceive  an 
advance  and  an  eagerness  to  purchase.  "^^ 

Only  one  other  article  on  Canadian  prosperity  will  Ije 
quoted.  It  was  dated  Montreal,  February  5,  and  addressed 
to  a  citizen  of  Providence.    The  writer  said : 

On  my  arrival  here  on  the  26th  of  January,  I  was  credibly  informed 
that  a  few  days  before,  more  than  eight  hundred  loaded  sleighs  crossed 
Lake  Champlain  in  one  day,  destined  from  the  United  States  for  this 
flourishing  place.  On  market  days,  which  are  Thursday  and  Saturday, 
it  is  very  difficult  to  pass  the  streets  near  the  market,  on  account  of  the 
prodigious  number  of  sleighs,  filled  with  provisions,  which  crowd  every 
space  and  avenue.  Provisions,  in  general,  are  very  cheap;  a  good  turkey 
may  be  purchased  for  38  cents,  a  pair  of  fat  fowls  for  34  cents,  large 
white  hares  for  8  and  10  cents,  a  good  mutton,  of  excellent  flavor,  for 
1  dollar  and  50  cents,  beef  for  8  cents  per  lb.,  butter  for  12  cents  per 
lb.,  loaf  sugar  for  17  cents  per  lb.,  and  a  variety  of  other  articles  equally 
cheap.  Sleighs  are  coming  in  daily,  and  every  house  is  so  thronged 
with  Americans,  and  others,  who  are  continually  coming  in,  that  genteel 
boarding  is  very  dear."» 

It  has  been  found  impracticable  in  a  work  of  this  scope  to 
attempt  a  detailed  discussion  of  the  economic  effects  of  the 
embargo  in  all  the  countries  of  western  Europe  and  in  all  the 
West  Indies,  but  a  careful  examination  of  the  newspapers  listed 
in  the  bibliography  makes  it  appear  obvious  that  the  price 
of  American  goods  and  goods  of  which  the  United  States  was 
the  principal  carrier  advanced  to  some  extent.  This  increase 
naturally  depended  to  a  large  extent  on  the  scarcity  of  the 
goods  and  the  demand  for  them.  Farmers  in  Europe  received 
a  higher  price  for  their  products;  hence  the  embargo  did  not 
injure  them.  Many  European  merchants  found  new  markets 
for  their  products  and  hence  were  not  hurt. 

The  manufacturers  and  factory  workers,  however,  suffered 
severely,  for  part  of  their  market  was  shut  off  and,  also,  and 
more  important,  there  was  a  decided  decrease  in  the  amount 
of  available  raw  cotton.  This  decrease  caused  cotton  mills  to 
be  closed  down,  threw  men  out  of  work,  and  increased  the  num- 


78  Ibid.,   February   27,    1809. 

79  National  Intelligencer,  March   22,    1809. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  93 

ber  of  people  wholly  or  partially  dependent  on  charity  for 
support.  Consumers  least  able  to  meet  the  higher  prices  thus 
had  to  bear  the  brunt  of  the  embargo.  With  regard  to  the 
foreign  dependencies  of  the  European  nations,  with  few  ex- 
ceptions, the  most  notable  being  Canada,  there  was  decided 
suffering  due  to  high  prices  resulting  from  the  scarcity  of 
American  goods  and  foodstuffs.  This  was  especially  true  of  the 
"West  Indies.  Naturally,  however,  the  European  nations  cared 
little  for  conditions  in  their  distant  possessions  when  they  were 
locked  in  a  life  and  death  struggle.  The  embargo  as  an 
economic  means  of  forcing  the  European  nations  to  rescind 
their  obnoxious  orders  and  decrees  was  consequently  a  failure. 


CHAPTER  V 

ATTITUDE  OF  THE  COUNTRY  TOWARDS  THE 

EMBARGO 

This  chapter,  with  the  following  one,  will  discuss  in  detail 
the  growing  opposition  of  the  country  to  the  embargo  from  its 
passage  in  1807  till  its  repeal  in  1809, 

Probably  the  most  powerful  molder  of  public  opinion  in 
the  embargo  period  was,  as  it  is  now,  the  press.  Many  of 
the  most  influential  papers  were  opposed  to  the  embargo; 
hence  they  aided  in  arousing  sentiment  against  it.  Four  of 
these  papers  will  be  quoted  at  this  time.  A  Boston  paper 
contained  a  bitter  attack  which  read  in  part : 

Our  government  seems  now  to  have  arrived  to  the  ne  plus  ultra  of 
its  defensive  measures;  an  Embargo!  Blessed  Administration.  Duane 
was  right,  though  we  thought  he  insulted  the  country,  when  he  said, 
that  like  our  own  mud  tortoise  we  must  draw  ourselves  into  our  shell, 
and  there  lie.  Yes — the  Philistines  are  upon  us;  France  frowns,  but 
we  must  not  be  trusted  to  our  yankee  indignation;  there  must  be  no 
collision  with  her;  we  must  stay  at  home  and  starve,  lest  from  the 
treatment  we  should  receive  by  venturing  abroad,  we  should  be  com- 
pelled to  resist  her.i 

The  same  article  predicted  low  prices  for  agriculture,  de- 
clared that  Jefferson  had  stated  that  the  embargo  would  ruin 
only  two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  merchants,  and  remarked : 
*'We  lament  most  sincerely,  that  in  this  country,  where  good 
living  is  so  cheap,  good  sense  is  so  dear.  "^ 

Another  Boston  paper  published,  with  approval,  a  letter 
beginning : 

The  act  laying  the  Embargo  being  the  law  of  the  land,  it  becomes  the 
duty  of  every  loyal  citizen  to  obey  all  its  provisions.  But  at  the  same  time, 
it  is  the  right  and  the  duty  of  every  American  Citizen  to  point  out  the 
impolicy  of  the  measure,  in  order  that  those  who  have  made  the  Law  may 
be  convinced  of  its  injustice,  and  repeal  it.  .  .3 

1  Reperetory,  December  29,   1807. 

2  Ibid.,  December  29,   1807. 

3  Columbian  Centinel,  January  6,  1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  95 

A  New  York  paper  contended,  about  a  month  after  the  pass- 
age of  the  embargo,  that  the  states  had  the  same  right  to  resist 
oppression  as  the  colonies  had  enjoyed.* 

Two  days  later  a  Philadelphia  paper  published  the  follow- 
ing item  on  the  embargo: 

' '  What  a  necromantic  word  this  is, 
With  what  a  shock  it  comes,  and  what  a  quiz: 
Divide  it  into  three,  and  it  will  shew, 
W^hen  read  backwards,  the  mandate  of  that  law 
Go  Bar  'Em."* 

The  pressure  of  the  embargo,  of  course,  was  first  felt  in  the 
commercial  cities.  Sailors  were  deprived  of  their  occupations. 
]Vrany  of  them  lived  from  hand  to  mouth  at  best ;  hence  if 
they  could  not  get  other  work,  they  had  to  beg  or  starve. 
Relief  was  not  adequate  for  the  numerous  applicants. 

Naturally  these  men  banded  together  more  or  less  in  their 
attempts  to  get  succor.  Thus,  on  January  7.  1808,  in  Boston 
eighty  to  one  hundred  sailors  carrying  a  flag  at  half  mast 
marched  with  martial  music  to  the  governor's  house  and  de- 
manded work  or  bread.  After  Governor  James  Sullivan  had 
talked  to  them  awhile,  however,  they  dispersed  quietly.*^ 

In  Philadelphia,  on  January  16,  1808,  a  crowd  of  discontent- 
ed, hungry,  and  penniless  sailors  met  together,  and  marched 
to  the  City  Hall  under  the  flag.  There  they  made  their  ap- 
peal to  the  mayor,  Robert  Wharton,  and  asked  what  they 
should  do.  He  replied  that  they  "constituted  an  unlawful 
assembly"  and  ordered  them  to  lower  the  flag  under  whose 
folds  they  had  marched  through  the  streets.  After  he  had 
given  this  order,  he  expressed  pity  for  their  condition,  said 
that  it  was  not  now  in  his  power  to  give  them  aid,  that  the 
government  thought  that  the  embargo  was  necessary,  and  that 
they  ought  to  separate  quietly.  He  added,  however,  that  the 
Chamber  of  Commerce  had  the  matter  of  relief  under  consid- 
eration. T.  R.  Cope,  one  of  the  promoters  of  the  scheme, 
nevertheless,   failed   in   his   effort   to  obtain   an  appropriation 


4  New  York  Herald,  January  28,   1808. 

5  Paulson's  American  Daily  Advertiser,  January   30,   1808. 

6  Amory,  T.  C,  Life  of  James  Sullivan  with  Selections  from  his  Writings,  Vol.   II, 
pp.   259-260. 


9G        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

of  five  thousand  dollars  for  their  relief.  For  a  while  the 
sailors  were  cared  for  by  private  subscription,  but  by  April 
these  subscriptions  had  ceased.  The  sailors,  in  large  part,  after 
further  appeals,  went  to  other  places,  many  to  Halifax,  Nova 
Scotia,  where  they  entered  the  British  service.'' 

Philadelphia's  interests  were  rapidly  turning  from  commerce 
to  manufacturing;  hence  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  the 
city  was  entirely  opposed  to  the  embargo.  The  measure  was 
lauded  as  one  which  would  encourage  manufactures  and  foster 
independence.  On  November  17,  1808,  the  manufacturers  and 
mechanics  held  a  dinner  in  the  room  formerly  occupied  by 
the  United  States  Senate  to  celebrate  the  improved  prospects 
of  industry.  Colonel  Humphreys  of  Connecticut  was  present. 
John  Dorsey,  the  president  of  the  festival,  appeared  in  an 
American  broadcloth  suit.  On  January  23,  1809,  after  the 
embargo  had  been  in  effect  over  a  year,  the  friends  of  the  act 
held  a  meeting  in  the  State  House  yard  in  its  praise. 

Eight  days  later,  the  opponents  of  the  measure  held  a  meet- 
ing at  the  same  place.  They  characterized  the  continuance  of 
the  embargo  laws  as  ''unjust,  impolitic,  and  oppressive''  on 
the  people  of  the  United  States,  and  the  measure  itself  as 
"weak,  inefficient,  and  useless"  as  a  method  of  coercion.  The 
meeting  was  not  a  peaceable  one,  for  various  attempts  were 
made  to  break  it  up.  Several  hundred  Democrats  with  drums 
beating  and  colors  flying  tried  to  storm  the  platform.  One 
thousand  sailors  drove  them  back.  The  invaders,  however, 
stood  as  near  the  platform  as  they  were  allowed  to  and  by 
beating  the  drums  and  hissing,  tried  to  keep  the  resolutions 
from  being  heard.  Seven  hundred  dollars  were,  nevertheless, 
raised  for  the  relief  of  distressed  seamen. 

Throughout  the  period  the  various  factions  quarreled,  but 
the  Democratic  legislature  of  Pennsylvania  supported  Congress. 
One  resolution  of  the  legislature  went  further  than  Congress 
had  gone,  for  it  recommended  that  members  of  the  next  legis- 


7  Scharf,  J.  T.  and  Westcott,  T.,  History  of  Philadelphia,  Vol.  I,  p.  530.  See  Paul- 
eon's  American  Daily  Advertiser,  January  18,  1808,  for  a  brief  account  of  the  mayor's 
speech  which  began,  "I  pity  you  from  the  bottom  of  my  heart,"  and  closed,  "May 
God  bless  you  all." 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  97 

lature  "appear  in  clothes  of  domestic  manufacture."*  A  sim- 
ilar resolution  in  the  national  House  of  Representatives,  April 
25,  1808,  raised  such  protests  that  it  was  quickly  withdrawn.^ 
^New  York  suffered  equally  with  Boston  from  the  embargo, 
but  her  opposition  was  not  carried  so  far.  Federalist  news- 
papers, of  course,  denounced  the  measure,  and  numerous  meet- 
ings early  protested  against  it.  One  of  the  late  protests  came 
from  a  general  meeting  of  Federalist  young  men  called  on 
Saturday,  November  12,  1808.  The  following  resolutions  were 
unanimously  passed: 

Resolved,  That  the  embargo  is  an  oppressive  and  ruinous  measure, 
operating  only  with  destructive  energy  on  ourselves,  virhile  it  has  rendered 
us  objects  of  the  contempt  and  ridicule  of  that  nation  against  which  it 
was  invidiously  directed,  but  whose  interest  it  now  particularly  subserves. 

Resolved,  That  its  continuance,  in  the  present  state  of  the  world,  will 
tend  to  the  complete  prostration  of  the  agricultural  and  commercial 
interests  of  our  country. 

Resolved,  That  dreading  the  consequences  of  seeking  redress  of  our 
grievances  in  any  other  than  a  constitutional  way,  we  pledge  ourselves 
to  each  other  and  to  our  suffering  fellow-citizens,  to  use  all  our  zeal, 
influence,  and  activity,  to  promote  a  change  of  men,  by  which  alone 
we  can  expect  a  change  of  measures.io 

t  Especially  did  the  embargo  harm  the  poor  in  New  York  and 
other  cities.  Naturally  those  injured,  for  the  most  part,  hated 
the  measure.  An  interesting  and  pathetic  item  from  a  New- 
York  country  newspaper,  written  thirteen  months  after  the 
passage  of  the  measure,  follows: 

Distress  of  the  poor.  No  person  possessed  of  the  common  feelings  of 
humanity  can  read  the  account  given  of  the  suffering  poor,  in  the  city 
of  New  York,  without  being  sensibly  affected.  Many  hundreds  of  honest,-* 
industrious  citizens  have  been  flung  out  of  employment  by  the  embargo 
and  have  no  honest  means  to  which  they  can  resort  to  support  them- 
selves and  families.  To  procure  bread  for  their  children,  they  have 
sold  their  furniture  and  clothing,  until  they  are  left  almost  naked  and 
destitute.  Never  (says  the  writer  of  an  address  to  the  citizens)  did 
our  city  contain  so  many  objects  of  misery! 

The  exertions  which  have,   and   are   still   making  by  the   humane  and 


8  Scharf,  J.  T.  and  Westcott,  T.,  History  of  Philadelphia,  Vol.  I,  pp.   531-539. 

9  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.  18,  pp.  2283,  2284. 

10  Scott's  Magazine ;  Edinburgh  Literary  Miscellany,  January,   1809,   Vol.   71,   p.   55. 


98        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

benevolent  to  seek  out  objects   of   distress  and   afford  them  relief,  will 
draw  upon  them  the  blessings  of  many.n 

t  During  the  operation  of  the  embargo  there  was  more  or  less 
opposition  between  the  North  and  South  growing  out  of  em- 
bargo differences.  A  letter  dated  Salem,  June  3,  1808,  took  up 
the  possibility  of  a  non-eonsumption  agreement  of  the  suffering 
commercial  states  that  henceforth  during  the  operation  of  the 
embargo  they  "refrain  from  the  use  and  consumption  of  any 
flour,  the  produce  of  any  state  south  of  Pennsylvania  and 
Delaware."  "This  would  indeed  be  an  unsocial  measure,"  the 
writer  admitted,  "and  we  hope  it  will  not  be  a  necessary 
one."i^ 

Apparently  there  was  some  talk  in  the  South  of  taxing  north- 
ern products.     Thus  an  item  in  a  Boston  paper  read: 

The  Baltimore  Whig  says  the  Southern  States  could  make  us  beggars 
by  taxing  our  produce.  It  is  not  very  magnanimous  thus  to  remind  us, 
suffering  as  we  are  what  party  controls  the  majority  in  Congress.  But 
are  we  to  consider  it  as  a  favour  that  our  produce  is  not  taxed  exclusively? 
Are  we  not  at  all  indebted  to  the  positive  provisions  of  the  Constitution? 
To  be  sure  the  embargo  regulations  as  to  our  coasting  trade  operate  as  a 
tax;  but  their  constitutionality  is  doubted  by  many.is 

r  In  various  southern  points  there  was  discontent  with  the 
embargo.  On  January  3,  1808,  John  R.  Donnell  wrote  to  A.  D. 
Murphey  from  Newbern,  North  Carolina:  "The  merchants  of 
this  town  appear  a  good  deal  ruffled  at  the  news  of  an  Em- 
bargo. We  are  in  doubt  concerning  the  cause  of  this  Embargo. 
It  is  the  opinion  of  many  that  we  shall  have  a  war  with 
France ;  which  opinion  is  corroborated  by  the  declaration  of 
Bonaparte  that  there  shall  be  no  neutrals."^* 

John  Lambert,  who  wrote  such  vivid  pictures  of  the  effect 
of  the  embargo  on  New  York  City,  also  described  conditions 
in  Charleston,  South  Carolina.  According  to  him,  there  were 
over  a  thousand  people,  who,  deprived  of  their  work  by  the 
embargo,  had  become  very  riotous.  Unable  to  pay  for  their 
room  and  board,  the  landlords  had  turned  them  out  after  their 


11  Catskill    Avierican    Eagle,    February    1,    1809. 

12  Boston    Gazette,   June   6,    1808. 

13  New    England    Palladium,    December    2,    1808. 

14  Publication     of    the     North     Carolina    Historical     Commission,     "The     Papers     of 
Archibald    D.    Murphy,"    Vol.    1,    p.    17. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  99 

money  was  gone.  For  several  nights  they  paraded  the  streets 
in  large  bodies.  Some  robberies  were  committed  and  a  few 
negroes  were  murdered.  In  spite  of  a  strengthened  city  guard 
it  was  so  dangerous  to  go  out  at  night  that  the  corporation 
finally  published  a  proclamation  forbidding  any  sailor  to  be 
out  of  his  lodging  house  after  seven  o'clock  at  night,  and 
advertised  that  any  sailor  who  was  out  of  work  might  go  on 
board  the  sloop  Hornet  and  the  United  States  gunboats,  where 
they  would  receive  food  and  be  at  liberty  to  leave  when  they 
chose.  Only  sixteen  went,  and  several  of  those  soon  returned 
because  of  floggings  they  had  received.  Soon  after  this,  the 
English  consul  advertised  that  British  seamen  might  have  a 
free  passage  home  in  British  ships  bound  for  Europe.  Over 
four  hundred  of  the  rioting  seamen  sailed  for  Europe. ^^ 

Newspapers,  of  course,  were  filled  with  references  to  the 
sufferings  of  the  sailors,  and  especially  to  their  enforced  exile. 
Two  sailors  met  one  morning  on  a  business  street  in  Hart- 
ford. "Holla!  messmate,"  said  one,  "where  are  you  bound?" 
"Bound  to  Halifax  by  the  pipers,"  replied  the  other,  "Which 
way  are  you  steering?"  "By  the  powers  of  Moll  Kelly,"  came 
the  answer,  "I  am  steering  the  same  course,  for  there's  no 
standing  this  dambargo  any  longer.  "^^ 

A  Savannah  item  of  February  2,  1808,  declared  that  the 
City  Council  and  Chamber  of  Commerce,  meeting  on  January 
30,  had  taken  into  consideration  the  situation  of  sailors 
"thrown  out  of  employ  by  the  Embargo."  The  decision  was 
to  ^end  the  northern  seamen  home  free  and  to  support  the 
southern  seamen,  who,  however,  were  to  be  compelled  to  work.^^ 

Towards  the  close  of  March,  the  citizens  of  Norfolk  were 
called  together  by  the  mayor  to  consider  measures  necessary 
in  order  to  relieve  distressed  sailors  in  that  place.^^ 

Three  months  of  the  embargo  deprived  8712  sailors  of  po- 


15  Lambert,  John,  Travels  Through  Canada  and  the  United  States  of  North  America 
in   the   Tears   1800,    1807    and   1808,   Vol.   II,    p.    162. 

16  Connecticut   Courant,   January    13,    1808. 

17  Philadelphia   Gazette   and   Daily   Advertiser,    February    19,    1808. 

18  Paulson's  American  Daily   Advertiser,    March   25,    1808. 


100       IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

sitions  in  foreign  trade  and  rendered  idle  half  of  those  for- 
merly employed  in  the  coasting  trade.^® 

Of  course  opposition  newspapers  capitalized  as  much  as  pos- 
sible the  harmful  effects  to  commerce  through  exaggerating 
those  effects  and  also  the  importance  of  trade.  An  interesting 
item  in  a  Massachusetts  paper  of  April  11,  1808,  read: 

Farmers,  Merchants,  Mechanicks,  Seamen,  Widows,  Orphans.     What  has 
hitherto  supported  our  political  family? 
Commerce ! 

What  has  afforded  the  means  of  reducing  our  National  Debt,  and  pay- 
ing the  Interest  on  our  Loans? 

Commerce ! 
What  has  given  Wealth  and  Consequence  to  the  United  States,  but 

Commerce ! 
When  this  living  spring,  this  redundant  source  of  public  prosperity  and 
private  happiness  is  wantonly  cut  off — When  the  Farmer  can  no  longer 
sell  his  produce — When  the  merchant  is  compelled  to  abandon  his  traffic — 
When  the  Seaman  is  driven  from  the  face  of  the  Ocean,  and  the  Mechanic 
is  deprived  of  his  accustomed  occupation — What  will  be  the  substitute,  but 

Taxes ! 

Poverty ! 

Imprisonment! 

Civil  Discord! 

Ruin !  20 

Grass  actually  began  to  grow  on  busy  river  and  ocean 
wharves,^^  but  the  greatest  loss  was  the  continued  emigration 
of  the  sailors.  By  the  middle  of  the  summer  few  were  left 
in  Charleston,  South  Carolina.^-  A  long  poem  of  thirty  stan- 
zas, modelled  after  Gray's  famous  elegy,  appeared  in  the 
Boston  Gazette  of  July  10,  1808.  Commerce  was  characterized 
as  dead  and  the  sailors  fleeing.  A  Quebec  item  of  June  3  read 
in  part:  "Between  forty  and  fifty  able  bodied  American  sea- 
men lately  arrived  here  in  vessels  from  Philadelphia."-^  A 
Philadelphia  paper  also  referred  to  the  numerous  sailors  who 
were  leaving  the  United  States  for  Halifax  and  elsewhere.-"* 


19  Ibid.,    April     12,     1808. 

20  Boston  Gazette,  April   11,   1808. 

21  Connecticut    Courant,   May   25,    1808. 

22  New  England  Palladium,   June   14,    1808. 

23  Boston  Gazette,  July  10,   1808. 

24  Paulson's  American  Daily   Advertiser,   July   19,    1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO.  1807-1809  101 

One  paper,  with  considerable  exaggeration,  declared  that  the 
sailors  were  forced  to  seek  enlplo^^nent  of  Great  Britain  and 
that  in  all  probability  there  were  not  one  thousand  seamen  left 
in  the  United  States.-^  Another  New  England  paper  also 
lamented  the  hundreds  of  sailors  forced  by  the  embargo  to 
take  service  under  a  foreign  flag.^^ 

Administration  papers,  on  the  other  hand,  tried  to  point  out 
beneficial  effects  of  the  embargo.  Thus,  the  Baltimore  Evening 
Post  of  March  24  in  answer  to  the  Federal  Republican  said: 

We  say  that  the  embargo  has  preserved  our  seamen;  and  that  no  man 
can,  with  justice,  deny  it.  Hundreds  of  seamen  have  various  trades;  they 
are  at  work  at  these,  and  cannot  in  a  moment  abandon  them,  admitting 
they  feel  perfectly  free  to  risk  themselves  among  the  harpies  of  Europe.^^ 

AVith  fish  well  nigh  unsalable  and  a  large  supply  on  hand, 
fishermen  naturally  suffered  as  did  the  sailors.  Prices  went 
down  and  the  fish  deteriorated.     An  article  of  interest  read: 

Embargoed  Fish. — It  is  ascertained  there  are  at  this  moment  in  Boston, 
(says  the  Centinel  of  Saturday  [April  21])  Two  Hundred  Thousand  quin- 
tals of  Fish — which  must  either  be  exported  or  destroyed  before  the  hot 
weather  sets  in  or  the  health  of  the  town  will  be  exposed.  This  quantity 
of  fish  before  the  embargo  laws  passed,  was  worth  at  $3,  per  quintal. 
Thus,  if  the  embargo  is  not  speedily  taken  off,  there  will  be  a  dead  loss  to 
the  public  of  $600,000.28 

Another  paper  reported  a  few  months  later  that  fish  which 
had  cost  $4400  before  the  embargo  sold  for  six  hundred  dollars 
after  the  embargo.'^ 

*  As  might  have  been  expected,  the  hard  times  occasioned  by 
the  embargo  led  to  an  increase  in  crime  especially,  in  the  Xortli. 
Thus,  because  of  several  attempted  robberies  in  Philadelphia 
the  citizens  established  paroles.^"  A  letter  from  Augusta, 
Maine,  dated  ]\Iarch  19,  referred  to  the  burning  of  the  gjiol  and 
a  large  tavern  house  nearby,  and  the  attempt  to  fire  the  court- 
house on  the  evening  of  the  sixteenth.  "The  turbulence  of  the 
people  in  this  quarter."  added  the  letter,  '"is  in  a  great  meas- 


25  Massachusetts  Spi/  or  Worcester  Gazette,  Sfijiteinber  28,   1808. 

26  Boston   Gazette,   November   21,    1808. 

27  National   Intelligencer,    April    10,    1809. 

28  Philadelphia   Gazette   and  Daily  Advertiser,  April    8,    1808. 

29  Neu^   Enr/land   Palladium,   September   30,    1808. 

30  Jhid.,  January  26,   1808. 


102         IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

ure  engendered  by  the  distressing  effects  oi  the  Embargo; 
idleness  and  poverty  inducing  to  disorder.  "^^ 

Again,  murder  was  sometimes  attributed  to  the  embargo. 
A  man  named  James  Clark  was  killed  ''by  the  Jefferson  and 
Embargo  mob."^-  Robberies  and  violence  of  all  Idnds  con- 
tinued to  be  attributed  to  the  embargo.^^  Tar  and  feathers  Avere 
liberally  applied  to  one  man  who  opposed  the  Eepublicans.'^* 

-Another  paper  declared  that  the  embargo  had  produced 
an  immense  influx  of  counterfeit  bank  bills  in  New  England 
and  innumerable  footpads,  burglars,  and  midnight  incendiaries 
in  New  York.^^ 

Once  in  a  while,  people  even  attacked  prisons  and  released 
men  held  there  for  the  violation  of  the  embargo  laws.  An 
Augusta  paper  reported  that  a  number  of  women  at  Castine, 
Maine,  effected  the  release  of  several  prisoners.^" 

Naturally,  petitions  by  the  hundreds  v/ere  sent  to  the  various 
members  of  Congre&s  by  their  constituents.  They  came  in 
greatest  number  from  New  England  and  New  York,  but  prac- 
tically every  state  in  the  union  was  represented.  All  wanted 
exemption  from  the  operation  of  the  embargo  or  the  repeal  of 
the  embargo  laws.  The  arguments  of  these  p(3titions,  parti- 
.-'ularly  those  of  the  fishermen,  'have  already  been  referred  to. 
Instances  of  the  use  of  petition,  however,  will  be  cited  again. 
On  January  4,  1808,  Mr.  Porter  of  Pennsylvania  presented  a 
petition  from  certain  Philadelphia  traders  urging  that  vessels 
loaded  and  cleared  before  receiving  notice  of  the  passage  of  the 
embargo  act  be  permitted  to  sail  for  the  places  to  which  they 
had  cleared,  or  that  Congress  grant  them  such  other  relief  as 
might  be  deemed  proper.".  On  March  11,  Mr.  Mumford  pre- 
sented a  memorial  from  some  merchants  of  New  York  City, 
asking  for  permission  to  export  a  certain  quantity  of  flaxseed 


31  Boston    Columbian    Centinel,    March    30,    1808. 

32  Ibid.,   May  4,    1808;    Connecticut   Courant,   May   11,    1808. 

33  New    England   Palladium,    September   13,    1808. 

34  JUd.,   October   28,    1808. 

35  Massachusetts  Spy   or   Worcester   Gazette,   December   28,    It 

36  Paulson's  American   Daily   Adertiser,    December    30,    1808. 

37  House  Journal,   10th  Session,   p.    106. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  103 

to  Ireland.''*     On  April  5,  three  petitions  from  Massachusetts 

were  presented  asking  that  fish  be  exempt  from  the  embargo.^® 

On  April  11,  Josiah  Qnincy  brought  in  four  others  to  a  like 

effect  ;^"    on  April  16  another  ;*^    and    on    April  25    still    an- 
other.*2 

Newspapers,  of  course,  fanned  the  flame  for  repeal  by  the 
circulation  of  inflammatory  articles  or  of  clever  and  catchy 
questions  and  comparisons.  Three  will  be  noted.  The  follow- 
ing catechism  appeared  in  a  Boston  paper  in  March,  1808 : 

q.     Why  is  the  Embargo  like  sickness? 

a.     Because  it   weakens  us. 

q.     Why  is  it  like  lameness? 

a.     Because  we  can't  go. 

q.     How  is  it  like  fire? 

a.     Because  it  consumes  our  substance. 

q.     How  is  it  like  a  whirlwind? 

a.  Because  we  can't  tell  certainly,  where  it  came  from,  or  where  it 
is  going ;  it  JcnocJcs  doton  some,  breaks  others,  and  turns  everything  topsy 
turvy. 

q.     HoAv  is  it  like  the  hydrophobia? 

a.  Because  it  makes  us  dread  the  water,  and  bark  like  the  dog  that 
bit  us. 

q.     How  is  it  like  broken  hones? 

a.  Because  it  stops  us  from  going  at  present,  and  leaves  us  cripples 
hereafter. 

q.     How  is  it  like  madness? 

a.     Because  we  can't  reason  with  it. 

q.     If  we  spell  it  backwards,  what  does  it  say? 

a.     O   Grab  Me.43 

A  writer  signing  himself  "Ethan  Allen"  in  a  Connecticut 
paper  propounded  the   following  item,   widely  copied: 

A  PIG  CASE 

Under  the  supplemental  Embargo  Laiv  humbly  submitted  to  his  honor 
the  President  of  the  United  States. 

This  fag-end  of  the  Embargo  goes  to  prohibit  the  farmers  of  Vermont 
and  New  Hampshire  from  driving  their  swine  into  Canada  for  sale.  Now 
suppose  a  man  should  drive  a  herd  of  hogs  close  up  to  the  line  of  tlie 

38  Ibid.,  p.   221. 

39  Ibid.,   p.    253. 

40  Ibid.,   p.    263. 

41  Ibid.,    p.    270. 

42  Ibid.,    p.     307. 

43  Boston  Gazette,  March  10,   1808. 


104      lOAVA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

United  States,  but  not  over,  and  a  Canadian  should  accidentally  make  his 
appearance  just  within  the  boundary  of  that  British  colony  with  a  basket 
of  corn  in  his  hand,  and  should  cry  Pig — Pig — Pig — and  the  whole  drove 
should  run  over  the  line  into  Canada  and  voluntarily  place  themselves  under 
the  government  of  the  tyrant  of  the  ocean.  Would  it  or  would  it  not  be 
a  breach  of  the  Emhargo  law;  and  if  so,  who  should  be  punished,  the 
farmer  who  drove  his  hogs  so  near  the  despotism,  the  swine  who,  regard- 
less of  the  blessing  of  a  free  country,  thus  ran  over  the  line;  or  the 
Canadian  who   tempted  them   to  this   anti-republican  act!** 

Another  catechism  coming  out  a  few  months  later  and  as- 
cribed to  the  Brattleborough  Reporter  read : 

Embargo ! 
■^    Wh}^  was  the  Emhargo  intended  by  Mr.  Jefferson  to  be  a  circle? 
Because  it  was  to  have  no  end. 
Why  is  the  Emhargo  like  a  poor  portrait  painter? 
Because  it  makes  a  great  many  bad  looking,  long  faces. 
Why  is  the  Emhargo  like  the  fifth  wheel  of  a  wagon? 
Because  it  is  of  no  manner  of  use. 
Why  is  the  Emhargo  like  the  jaw  bone  of  an  ass? 
Because  it  has   ruined  thousands. 

Why  is  the  Emhargo  like  couching  for  the  cataract? 
Because  it  makes  those,  who  were  before  politically  blind,  see  clearly. 
Why  is  the  Emhargo  like  an  incurable  sore   finger? 
Because  it  ought  to  be  taken  off. 
Why  is  the  Emhargo  like  good  strong  coffee? 
Because  Bonaparte  is  remarkably  fond  of  it. 
Why  is  the  Emhargo  like  red  wine  when  we  have  not  white? 
Because  it  makes  us  stick  to  Port. 
Why  is  the  Emhargo  like  the  sting  of  ingratitude? 
Because  it  is  painful  to  bear. 

Lastly,  Why  is  the  Emhargo  like  French  influence  in  our  cabinet? 
Because  unless  speedily  removed,  it  will  be  the  ruin  of  America.*^ 

J  When  Congress  met  again  in  November,  the  petitions  had 
changed  to  direct  requests  for  repeal  of  the  embargo  laws.  On 
November  16,  Mr.  Ver  Plank  of  New  York  brought  in  a  peti- 
tion from  Dutchess  County  asking  for  repeal.^®  On  the  next 
day  Mr.  Livermore  of  Massachusetts  presented  several  petitions 
to  that  effect  from  Newburyport  and  other  towns.*^  On  No- 
vember 21,  Mr.  Quincy  presented  one  from  Topham,  and  Mr. 

44  Massachusetts  Spy,  or  Worcester  Gazette,  April  13,   1808. 

45  Ibid.,  September  21,   1808. 

46  House   Journal,    10th   Session,    353. 

47  lUd.,   p.    355. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  105 

Dana  of  Connecticut  one  from  Woodbridge.**  Four  days  later, 
November  25,  Mr.  Gardenier  of  New  York  presented  petitions 
from  some  of  the  electors  and  inhabitants  of  Ontario  County 
asking  for  the  immediate  repeal  of  the  embargo.*^.  On  Novem- 
ber 28,  and  again  on  December  2,  he  brought  in  similar  peti- 
tions.^°  On  December  20,  Mr.  Holland  of  North  Carolina  pre- 
sented a  petition  from  Lincoln  asking  for  the  repeal  of  the 
embargo;  on  January  9,  1809,  he  presented  two  other  petitions 
to  a  like  effect.^^  On  January  27,  Mr.  Findlay  of  Pennsylvania 
brought  in  a  petition  from  Westmoreland  County,  for  the  re- 
peal of  the  embargo.^-  Four  days  later,  January  31,  Mr.  Mum- 
ford  brought  in  petitions  from  the  first,  second,  and  fifth  wards 
of  New  York  City,  for  the  repeal  of  the  embargo.^'  About 
two  weeks  later,  February  13,  Mr.  Milnor  of  Pennsylvania 
brought  in  similar  petitions  from  the  city  and  county  of 
Philadelphia.^* 

Examples  of  petitions,  a  constitutional  method  of  obtaining 
relief,  might  be  multiplied  indefinitely,  but  those  cited  above 
are  sufficient  to  show  the  general  character  and  the  quarter 
from  which  they  came.  It  now  remains  to  notice  a  few  special 
petitions.  On  January  9,  1809,  Mr.  Lewis  of  Virginia  present- 
ed a  petition  from  Marsham  Waring  and  other  inhabitants  of 
the  District  of  Columbia.  This  petition  urged  that  all  execu- 
tions which  may  have  been  or  might  be  awarded  against  the 
petitioners  and  other  inhabitants  of  the  district  might  "be 
stayed  during  the  continuance  of  the  embargo  and  non-inter- 
course laws  of  the  United  States,"  or  that  such  other  relief 
as  "the  wisdom  and  justice  of  Congress"  might  deem  meet  be 
granted. ^^ 

Frequently  memorials  came  direct  to  the  president.  One  of 
the  most  interesting  of  these  was  that  of  St.  Albans,  Vermont. 

48  Ibid.,  pp.   360,   361. 

49  Ibid.,  p.   365. 

50  Ibid.,    pp.    367,    372. 

51  Ibid.,    pp.    410,    455. 

52  Ibid.,   p.   495. 

53  Ibid.,   p.    501. 

54  Ibid.,    p.    521. 

55  Ibid,,  p.   456. 


106       IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

Some  direct  quotations  from  it  will  be  given.     After  protesting 
against  the  embargo,  the  petition  declared: 

That  in  an  agricultural  state  like  this,  the  part  of  the  productions  which 
the  inhabitants  do  not  want  for  their  own  consumption  is  generally  ren- 
dered valuable  only  by  the  commerce  of  the  maritime  states;  that  a  people 
situated  as  are  your  memorialists,  at  so  great  a  distance  from  the  Atlantic 
seaports,  must  at  all  times  experience  many  and  great  commercial  disad- 
vantages ;  that  to  surmount  these,  and  many  other  difficulties  incident  to 
their  local  situation  your  memoiialists  *  *  *  have  depended  alone  on  their 
agricultural  pursuits,  on  the  manufacture  of  pot  and  pearl  ashes,  and  the 
timber  of  their  forests;  that  by  the  persevering  toil  and  unceasing  labour 
of  hardy  and  independent  freemen,  the  gloomy  wilderness,  which  *  *  * 
but  a  few  years  since  was  occupied  only  by  the  savage  and  brute  had  given 
place  to  agricultural  enterprise,  .  .  .  from  which  the  cultivators  of  soil 
began  to  enjoy  the  good  of  their  labour. se 

The  memorial  then  referred  to  the  act  of  March  12,  1808, 
which  cut  off  the  exportation  of  agricultural  produce,  pot  and 
pearl  ashes,  lumber,  etc.  to  Canada  and  thereby  caused  great 
suffering.     It  declared: 

After  an  impartial  investigation  of  the  subject,  so  far  as  they  are  capable 
your  memorialists  cannot  conceive  how  the  object  of  the  general  embargo, 
which  was  the  protection  of  our  vessels,  our  seamen,  and  merchandise  on 
the  high  seas,  can  be  any  way  connected  with  the  provisions  of  the  law  of 
March  12th,  or  how  our  vessels,  our  seamen,  and  our  merchandise  on  the 
high  seas  can  be  exposed  to  any  danger  from  the  belligerent  powers  of 
Europe,  in  consequence  of  commercial  intercourse,  either  by  land  or  water, 
between  the  citizens  of  Vermont  and  Lower  Canada,  and  places  in  like 
situations ;  nor  can  they  be  taught,  that  a  law  which  forbids  the  exchange 
of  such  commodities  as  they  do  not  want,  for  the  conveniences  and  necessar- 
ies of  life,  and  especially  for  the  sinews  of  war,  the  gold  and  silver  of  that 
nation,  whose  injury,  it  seems,  is  contemplated  by  such  law,  can  in  any 
possible  degree  tend  to  the  welfare  of  the  union.sr 

The  memorial  next  expressed  surprise  at  the  president's 
proclamation  of  April  19,  which  had  called  upon  the  inhabit- 
ants to  quit  forming  insurrections  against  the  United  States, 
to  stop  opposing  and  obstructing  the  execution  of  the  United 
States  laws,  to  return  to  their  homes  peaceably,  and  to  aid  all 
authorities  and  other  persons,  civil  or  military,  in  the  suppres- 
sion of  law  violations  by  force  of  arms  or  otherwise.^®     The 


56  American  Register,   Vol.   Ill,   pp.   450,   451. 

57  Ibid.,    Vol.    Ill,    pp.    451,    452. 

58  American  State  Papers,  Class  X,  Miscellaneous,  Vol.   I,   p.   940. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  107 

petition  insisted  that  the  conditions  had  been  misrepresented, 
and  "that  if  individuals,  finding  themselves  and  their  families 
on  the  verge  of  ruin  and  wretchedness,  have  attempted  to 
evade  the  embargo  restrictions,  and  have  actually  aceom])lished 
their  purpose,  this  could  never  furnish  a  cause  for  proclaiming 
to  the  world  that  insurrection  and  rebellion  were  chargeable 
on  the  good  people  of  this  district;  and  with  confidence  your 
memorialists  declare  their  belief,  that  nothing  more  than  this 
had  taken  place.  "^^ 

The  petition  then  spoke  of  the  degradation  caused  by  a 
guard,  of  the  patriotism  shown  by  Vermont  during  and  after 
the  Revolutionary  War,  and  closed  as  follows: 

In  fine,  since  Congress  have  confided  to  the  wisdom  and  prudence  of  the 
executive  of  the  United  States,  a  discretionary  power  to  remove  the  restric- 
tions of  which  your  memorialists  complain,  they  present  to  him  their  ardent 
request  that  the  operation  of  the  aforementioned  law  of  March  12th  may 
be  immediately  discontinued,  pursuant  to  the  power  in  him  reposed.  And 
your  memorialists,  as  in  duty  bound,  will  ever  pray.so 

Other  petitions  were  directed  to  the  president  in  an  effort 
to  induce  him  to  exercise  the  discretionary  power  of  repeal 
granted  him  by  the  act  of  April  22.  Some  of  his  friends  be- 
lieved that  the  main  object  of  the  petitioners  was  to  worry 
Jefferson,  but  the  economic  pressure  of  the  embargo  was  grow- 
ing stronger.    On  August  19,  1808,  Madison  wrote  to  Gallatin: 

I  have  just  received  a  petition  to  the  President  from  merchants  in  Boston 
for  a  removal  of  the  embargo,  or  a  call  of  Congress  for  the  purpose;  and 
I  see  another  is  on  foot,  founded  on  the  additional  market  opened  in 
Spain  and  expected  in  Portugal.  Such  are  the  malignant  manoeuvres  for 
vexing  the  Executive.  No  efforts  of  the  President  could  now  assemble 
Congress  ten  days  sooner  than  the  time  to  which  they  are  adjourned.  And 
to  acknowledge  the  new  and  local  power  set  up  in  Spain,  and  thereby  take 
part  in  the  war  against  the  others,  would  be  an  infatuation  which  the  most 
stupid  or  the  most  wicked  only  could  suggest.^i 

One  method  of  lightening  the  operation  of  the  embargo  was 
the  granting  of  permits  for  the  importation  of  foodstuffs  into 
one  state  from  another.  This  power  was  turned  over  to  the 
governors   of   various   states    or   territories    as    Massachusetts, 


59  American  Register,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  452. 

60  Ibid.,   Vol.    Ill,   p.   453. 

61  Writings   of  Albert   Gallatin,  Vol.   I,   p.   409. 


108      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

New  Hampshire,  South  Carolina,  Georgia,  and  Orleans,  but 
was  most  widely  used  by  Governor  Sullivan  of  Massachusetts. 
Naturally,  this  action  aroused  considerable  criticism,  especially 
in  New  England.     A  Boston  paper  said: 

' '  People  of  Massachusetts,  this  is  your  freedom !  Make  your- 
selves agreeable  by  some  means  to  Governor  Sullivan  or  you 
are  not  to  share  the  profits  of  our  coasting  commerce.  Make 
yourselves  agreeable  to  those  who  obtain  the  indulgence  of  our 
political  Pope,  or  you  may  go  without  bread.  .  ."^- 

" Hence  it  appears,"  declared  another  Boston  paper,  "that  the  Chinese 
policy  of  granting  licenses  to  Hon.  Merchants  is  already  adopted  in  the 
United  States.  How  the  inhabitants  of  the  proscribed  states  will  relish 
a  system  of  monopoly,  which  must  either  starve  them  or  compel  them  to 
pay  whatever  price  the  favored  merchants  may  choose  to  place  on  their 
provisions,  remains  to  be  seen.  The  step,  from  such  an  assumption  of, 
executive  authority  to  the  exercise  of  imperial  power,  is  but  a  short  one."63 

A   Connecticut   paper  published   the   following  item: 

The  full  Tide  of  Experiment. — Mr.  Jefferson  seems  determined  to  as- 
certain the  quantity  of  imposition  which  the  people  will  bear.  The  pro- 
hibition of  the  coasting  trade  is  an  assumption  of  tyrannical  power  almost 
equal  to  the  Decrees  of  Bonaparte. — The  eastern  states  cannot  subsist  with- 
out supplies  of  Indian  corn  and  flour  from  the  middle  and  southern  states. 
Mr.  Jefferson  has  made  Governor  Sullivan  the  judge  of  the  quantity  of 
bread  the  good  people  of  Massachusetts  may  eat,  and  of  the  prices  at 
which  they  shall  buy  that  quantity;  nay  more,  he  is  to  point  out  the 
member  of  the  Legion  of  Honor  who  is  to  have  exclusive  profits  on  the 
importation  of  bread.  Was  ever  such  bare  faced  tyranny  attempted  in 
America  before?  Will  independent  Yankees  submit  to  such  an  impo- 
sition ?64 

Over  six  months  later  a  Boston  paper  intimated  that  some 
individuals  profited  by  the  embargo.    An  interesting  item  read : 

It  is  calculated  and  by  republicans  too,  at  the  seat  of  government  that 
Gen.  Smith  of  Baltimore  has  made  Four  Hundred  Thousand  Dollars  by 
the  Embargo.  We  think  there  must  be  exaggeration  in  the  case,  altho' 
the  recent  rise  upon  his  enormous  capital  of  goods  must  amount  to  an 
immense  sum.65 

Gallatin,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  did  not  believe  in  grant- 


62  Boston  Reperctory,  May   17,    1808. 

63  Boston   Gazette,   May   19,    1808. 

64  Connecticut    Courant,    June    1,    1808. 

65  New  England  Palladium,  January   10,   1809. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  109 

ing  discretionary  powers  to  governors.  On  'May  23,  1808,  he 
wrote  to  Jefferson  that  the  best  method  would  have  been  to 
call  on  the  governors  for  information.  "Kno.wing  Governors 
Sullivan  and  Charles  Pinckney  as  we  do,"  he  said,  "we  can 
have  no  confidence  in  the  last  and  must  rest  assured  that  the 
other  will  refuse  no  certificates."*^''  Five  days  later  he  wrote 
that  there  was  more  danger  from  the  permits  than  from  any 
other  quarter,  for  Governor  Sullivan  did  not  dare  refuse  a 
single  permit.  One  mail  alone,  Gallatin  said,  brought  permits 
for  eleven  thousand  barrels  of  flour  exclusive  of  corn  and  rye 
meal.®^ 

On  July  15,  1808,  Gallatin  wrote  to  Jefferson  summarizing 
Sullivan's  permits  as  received  at  the  treasury  up  to  that  day. 
They  amounted  to  49,800  barrels  of  flour,  99,400  bushels  of 
corn,  560  tierces  of  rice,  and  two  thousand  bushels  of  rye.  In 
addition  to  those  specified  amounts  he  had  granted  permits 
for  either  7,450  barrels  of  flour,  or  thirty  thousand  bushels  of 
corn.  The  flour  then  would  amount  to  57,250  barrels,  or  the 
com  to  129,400  bushels.  In  addition  to  granting  permits  to 
bring  in  exorbitant  amounts  of  provisions,  Gallatin  charged 
Sullivan  with  a  lack  of  care  in  selecting  the  persons;  for,  said 
he,  according  to  report,  some  of  the  permits  were  issued  to 
persons  resident  in  Alexandria  and  Georgetown,  "of  whom  he 
could  know  nothing  "^^ 

Jefferson  at  once  wrote  to  Sullivan  about  the  certificates, 
but  apparently  with  little  effect.  The  latter  declared,  in  his 
reply  of  July  21,  that  three  weeks  after  the  certificates  were 
refused,  scarcity  would  involve  the  state  in  mobs,  riots,  and 
convulsions  which  would  give  his  enemies  triumph  and  his 
friends  mortification.^^  Two  days  later  Sullivan  wrote  that  the 
seaport  towns  were  dependent  almost  entirely  for  bread  on  the 
Southern  and  Middle  States,  that  the  people  of  the  interior 
lived  on  a  mixture  of  Indian  corn  and  rye  for  a  common  food 
but  that  their  fine  bread   and   pastry  came  from  the    South, 


66  Writings   of   Albert    Gallatin,    Vol.    I,    p.    391. 

67  Ibid.,  p.  393. 

68  Jbid.,  p.  394. 

69  Jefferson,  MSS.  Quoted  in  Adams.   Henry,  History  of  the   United  States.  Vol.  IV, 
p.    255. 


110      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

and  that  the  country  towns  consumed  more  imported  flour 
than  the  equivalent  of  all  the  grain  they  carried  to  the  sea- 
board. He  insisted  that  the  imported  rice  was  small,  admitted 
that  the  Indian  corn  brought  in  was  greater,  but  urged  that 
it  could  not  find  a  market  in  the  British  or  French  West 
Indies  even  if  there  were  no  embargo.  The  corn,  he  declared, 
was  in  demand  not  as  food  for  men,  but  for  horses  which 
consumed  an  astonishing  amount.''" 

In  response  to  these  letters  and  to  correct  the  abuses  which 
he  believed  existed,  Jefferson  wrote  to  Sullivan  on  August  12, 
1808: 

In  mine  of  July  16th  I  had  stated  that,  during  the  two  months  preceding 
that,  your  certificates  received  at  the  Treasury,  amounted,  if  I  rightly  recol- 
lect, to  about  60,000  barrels  of  flour,  and  a  proportionate  quantity  of  corn. 
If  this  whole  quantity  had  been  hona  fide  landed  and  retained  in  Massa- 
chusetts I  deemed  it  certain  there  could  not  be  a  real  want  for  a  consid- 
erable time,  and,  therefore,  desired  the  issues  of  certificates  might  be  dis- 
continued. If,  on  the  other  hand,  a  part  has  been  carried  to  foreign 
markets  it  proves  the  necessity  of  restricting  reasonably  this  avenue  of 
abuse.  This  is  my  sole  object,  and  not  that  a  real  want  of  a  single  indivi- 
dual should  be  one  day  unsupplied.  In  this  I  am  certain  we  shall  have 
the  concurrence  of  all  the  good  citizens  of  Massachusetts,  who  are  too  pa- 
triotic and  too  just  to  desire  by  calling  for  what  is  superfluous,  to  open  a 
door  for  the  frauds  of  unprincipled  individuals  who,  trampling  on  the  laws, 
and  forcing  a  commerce  shut  to  all  others,  are  enriching  themselves  on 
the  sacrifices  of  their  honester  fellow  citizens; — sacrifices  to  which  these 
are  generally  and  willingly  submitted  as  equally  necessary  whether  to  avoid 
or  prepare  for  war.^i 

On  September  16,  Gallatin  wrote  Jefferson  from  New  York 
that  a  large  part  of  the  difficulty  in  Massachusetts  was  due  to 
Sullivan's  permits,  for  they  gave  the  power  to  smuggle  out 
other  things,  when,  without  them,  fish  would  be  the  only  prod- 
uct which  could  be  smuggled  out.  He  declared  that  the  issu- 
ance of  certificates  ought  to  be  stopped  or  that  some  way  to 
prevent  the  collectors  from  respecting  them  should  be  devised.^^ 
About  two  months  later,  November  13,  1808,  Jefferson  wrote 
Lieutenant  Governor  Levi  Lincoln  of  Massachusetts  as  follows: 


70  Jefferson   MSS.      Quoted   in   Adams,    H.,    History   of   the    United   States,   Vol.    IV, 
pp.  254,  255. 

71  Writings  of  Thomas  Jefferson,  Vol.   IX,   p.   205. 

72  Writings   of  Albert   Gallatin,   Vol.   I,   p.   418. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  111 

I  enclose  you  a  petition  from  Nantucket  and  refer  it  for  your  decision. 
Our  opinion  here  is  that  that  place  has  been  so  deeply  concerned  in  smug- 
gling, that  if  it  wants,  it  is  because  it  has  illegally  sent  away  what  it  ought 
to  have  retained  for  its  owa  consumption.  Be  so  good  as  to  bear  in  mind 
that  I  have  asked  the  favor  of  you  to  see  that  your  state  encounters  no 
real  want  while  at  the  same  time,  where  applications  arc  made  merely  to 
cover  fraud,  no  facilities  towards  that  be  furnished.  I  presume  there  can 
be  no  want  in  Massachusetts  as  yet,  as  I  am  informed  that  Governor 
Sullivan's  permits  are  openly  bought  and  sold  here  [Washington]  and  in 
Alexandria  and  at  other  markets  .  .  .  ''^ 

Jefferson's  enemies  naturally  charged  him  with  an  attempt 
to  regulate  their  diet.  On  July  12,  1808,  he  wrote  to  Gallatin 
that  the  declaration  of  the  New  York  bakers  that  their  cus- 
tomers would  not  be  satisfied  with  bread  made  from  New  York 
flour  was  a  libel  on  the  produce  and  citizens  of  that  state.  If 
that  disposition  prevailed,  he  said,  the  next  application  would 
be  for  vessels  to  go  to  New  York  state  for  apples  because  the 
apples  of  that  state  were  more  highly  flavored  than  the  apples 
of  other  states.'^*  This  same  rule,  apparently,  was  applied  to 
Louisiana,  for  on  September  9,  1808,  he  wrote  Gallatin:  "You 
know  I  have  been  aver.se  to  letting  Atlantic  flour  go  to  New 
Orleans  merely  that  they  may  have  the  whitest  bread  pos- 
sible. "^^ 

Of  course,  the  excessive  power  assumed  by  the  president  and 
exercised  by  his  officials,  often  with  poor  judgment,  gave  rise 
to  bitter  opposition  and  attempts  at  evasion.  Before  taking 
up  the  question  of  smuggling,  however,  an  undated  but  char- 
acteristic letter  of  Joseph  Hopkinson  of  Philadelphia  to  Tim- 
othy Pickering  will  be  quoted : 

Bless  the  embargo!  thrice  blessed  the  President's  proclamation,  by  which 
his  minions  are  to  judge  of  the  appetites  of  his  subjects  how  much  food 
they  may  reasonably  consume,  and  who  shall  supply  them!  If  these  things 
awaken  not,  we  are,  indeed,  in  the  sleep  of  death,  and  can  look  for  re- 
animation  only  at  the  sound  of  the  last  trump. 

Have  you  wise  men  settled  the  question,  whether,  under  the  proclamation 
and  embargo  system,  a  child  may  be  lawfully  born  without  clearing  out 
at  the  Custom  House  ?76 


73  Writini/s   of   Thomas  Jefferson,   Vol.    IX,    p.    227. 

74  Works,   Vol.   V,    p.    307.      Quoted   in   Adams,    H.,   op.   cit.,   Vol.   IV,   p.   260. 

75  Works,  Vol.   V,   p.   363.      Quoted   in   Adams,   H.,   op.  cit.,  Vol.   IV,   p.   260. 

76  Upham,   C.   W.   The  Life   of  Timothy  Pickering,   p.   131. 


112      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

-  With  the  passage  of  new  embargo  laws  attempts  at  evasion 
became  more  marked.  The  Annals  of  Congress  abound  with 
references  to  smuggling,  many  of  which  have  been,  and  more 
of  which  will  be,  referred  to  in  the  arguments  on  the  embargo. 
The  very  inconveniences,  not  to  say  hardships,  imposed  by  the 
embargo  led  to  law  violations.  J.  B.  McMaster  points  out  some 
of  these  troubles.  He  takes  the  case  of  a  miller  who  lived  ten 
miles  up  East  River.  This  man  bought  wheat  in  the  city, 
carried  it  to  his  mill  on  his  own  boat,  and  took  the  flour  back 
to  New  York  in  the  same  way.  According  to  the  laws  in  force 
in  the  summer  of  1808,  he  had  to  go  to  New  York,  obtain  a 
clearance,  and  give  bond  to  bring  flour  to  that  city.  He  then 
had  to  get  a  certificate  from  the  inspector,  and  go  to  the  cus- 
tom house  to  prevent  a  forfeiture  of  two  hundred  dollars  for 
each  ton  of  his  boat.  Under  the  same  bond  he  might  obtain 
leave  to  buy  a  certain  quanity  of  wheat  and  carry  it  to  his 
mill.  His  next  step  was  to  go  to  a  magistrate  six  miles  away 
and  pay  a  good  fee  for  a  certificate  stating  that  the  wheat 
had  really  been  landed  at  the  mill.  If  he  failed  to  bring  the 
certificate  to  the  collector  in  New  York  within  thirty  days  he 
forfeited  his  bond. 

Farmers  of  Greenwich,  thirty  miles  up  Long  Island  Sound, 
sent  lamb,  veal,  poultry,  and  potatoes  to  New  York.  Eight 
small  vessels  were  kept  busy  with  this  trade.  The  owners, 
according  to  the  new  embargo  laws,  had  to  clear  at  the  custom 
house  and  give  bonds  to  land  their  potatoes  in  New  York. 
Greenwich,  however,  was  in  the  jurisdiction  of  Fairfield,  twenty 
miles  away;  hence  the  merchants  had  to  make  this  journey 
before  each  trip  to  New  York  in  order  to  get  their  clearances 
and  bonds  and  after  each  trip  to  present  their  certificates  of 
landing  at  New  York  and  have  their  bonds  cancelled.  The 
owners,  as  a  result,  spent  nearly  half  their  time  on  the  road 
between  Greenwich  and  Fairfield.^'^  The  Enforcing  Act  of 
January  9,  1809,  compelled  owners  of  vessels  to  go  two  hun- 
dred to  three  hundred  miles  to  sign  bonds  because  of  new 
regulation   of  which   they  were   ignorant.''^ 

Opposition  grew  stronger  after  the  passage  of  the  first  and 


77  McMaster,  J.   B.  A  History  of  the  People  of  the   United  States,  Vol.  Ill,  p.   300. 

78  Boston  Reveretory,  January  27.   1809. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  113 

third  supplemental  acts  and  the  president's  proclamation  of 
April  19.  Big  rafts  of  lumber  collected  on  the  northern  bound- 
ary at  Lake  Champlain.  One  of  these  was  said  to  be  half  a 
mile  long,  to  carry  a  bullet-proof  fort,  and  to  be  manned  by 
five  or  six  hundred  armed  men  ready  to  defy  the  custom-house 
officers.  According  to  report,  it  carried  Vermont's  surplus  pro- 
duce for  a  year, — wheat,  potash,  pork,  and  beef — worth  over 
three  hundred  thousand  dollars.  The  governors  of  Vermont 
and  New  York  ordered  out  detachments  of  militia  to  stop  the 
traffic,  but  it  continued.''^ 

Store  houses,  to  which  produce  was  carried  for  miles  a])Out. 
were  established  along  the  northern  and  southern  boundary. 
Eastport  in  Maine  and  St.  Marys  in  Georgia  were  great  collec- 
tion points  of  flour  and  other  provisions;  from  the  former 
goods  were  sent  to  Canada,  and  from  the  latter  to  the  AVest 
Indies  and  other  markets.^° 

One  K)f  the  most  peaceful  methods  used  in  Vermont  was 
to  load  a  dozen  sleds  or  wagons  and  drive  towards  Canada. 
The  drivers  would  select  a  hill  with  steep  slopes  close  to  the 
boundary  line  and  build  a  rude  hut  on  the  summit  in  such  a 
way  that  the  pulling  of  a  stone  from  the  foundation  would 
cause  the  floor  and  walls  to  fall  and  the  contents  of  the  build- 
ing to  be  thrown  on  English  ground.  After  these  arrangements 
were  made,  the  potash,  flour,  pork,  and  lumber  would  be  un- 
loaded, placed  in  the  building,  and  the  stone  removed.  The 
barrels  would  thus  be  sent  rolling  into  Canada  where  they  be- 
came English  property  and  were  quickly  carried  away.'^^ 

Fifteen  thousand  barrels  of  flour  were  smuggled  out  of 
Genessee  County,  New  York.  One  of  the  favorite  smuggling 
points  on  the  Lakes  was  at  Black  Rock  just  above  the  falls 
of  Niagara  on  the  American  side  of  the  Iroquois.     To  the  hotel 


79  National    Intelligencer,    May    23,    1808. 

80  Hildreth,  Richard,  History  of  the  United  States  of  America,  Vol.  VI,  p.  69.  The 
newspapers  of  the  period  are  crowded  with  references  to  smuggling,  but  only  a 
few  instances  will  be  cited.  Thus,  in  the  North,  foodstuffs,  potash,  etc.,  were  taken 
across  the  line  to  Canada  (Boston  Reperetory,  June  21,  1808;  Paulson's  American 
Daily  Advertiser,  January  14,  1809 -.Connecticut  Gourant,  February  3,  1809).  Like- 
wise in  the  South  foodstuffs,  cotton,  etc.,  were  sent  from  the  country  notwithstanding 
the  embargo  (Relf's  Philadelphia  Gazette  and  Daily  Advertiser,  April  16,  1808; 
Freeman's  Journal,  January  2,  1809;  Richmond  Enquirer,  January  7.  and  31,  1809). 

81  McMaster,  J.  B.,  History  of  the  People  of  the   United  States,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  294. 


114      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

erected  there  British  merchants  and  American  farmers  living 
south  and  east  of  Black  Rock  came;  the  former  brought  cash 
while  the  latter  brought  wagon  loads  of  flour.  The  English 
merchant  would  then  offer  the  farmer  about  eight  dollars  a 
barrel  for  his  flour  on  condition  that  the  flour  be  unloaded  on 
the  river  bank.  The  farmer  would  do  this  in  the  evening.  On 
the  following  morning  the  flour  would  be  gone,  for  during  the 
night  it  would  be  conveyed  to  the  Canadian  shore  on  small 
boats,  carried  by  wagon  around  the  falls,  and  then  loaded  on 
British  boats  and  carried  to  Great  Britain  and  her  colonies.*^ 

Potash  was  also  smuggled  into  Canada  by  the  thousands  of 
barrels.  A  Canadian  letter  dated  January  30,  1809,  declared 
that  thirty  thousand  barrels  had  been  received  in  Quebec  from 
the  United  States  during  ISOS.^^ 

Attempts  at  evasion,  however  were  not  always  successful. 
A  South  Carolina  shipper  offered  bonds  and  applied  for  clear- 
ance to  carry  five  hundred  hogsheads  of  rum  from  Charleston 
to  New  Orleans.  The  inspector,  surprised  at  this  large  amount 
of  rum,  made  an  investigation  and  discovered  that  the  hogs- 
heads were  full  of  rice,  which  was  to  be  taken  to  Havana, 
sold,  and  a  cargo  of  rum  bought  and  carried  to  New  Orleans. 
The  collector  there  would  certify  that  the  rum  had  been  landed 
and  the  certificate  taken  back  to  Charleston  would  release  the 
bond.** 

All  attempts,  as  previously  indicated,  were  not,  peaceable. 
Violence  was  not  uncommon  along  the  whole  northern  border. 
Five  open  boats  loaded  with  potash  tried  to  make  the  run 
from  Fort  Niagara  to  Canada,  and  in  spite  of  the  troops  and 
collector,  three  were  successful.  In  Oneida  County,  on  Salmon 
River,  the  men  on  a  revenue  cutter  acted  so  insolently  that 
the  people  of  the  county  seized  them  and  put  them  in  jail. 
At  Lewiston,  twenty  men  who  were  believed  to  have  gone  to 
Canada  for  that  purpose,  crossed  over  and  forcibly  carried  off 
a  quantity  of  flour.*''  At  New  Haven,  Connecticut,  a  revenue 
vessel  which  had  captured  a  sloop  guilty  of  violating  the  em- 


' 


82  Baltimore   Evening   Post,   January   24,    1809. 

83  Freeman's  Journal  and  Philadelphia  Mercantile   Advertiser,   February   4,    1809. 

84  McMaster,  J.  B.,  op.  cit..  Vol.  Ill,  p.  298. 

85  Ibid.,   p.    306. 


THE  A:^IERICAN  embargo,  1807-1809  115 

bargo  laws  was  attacked.  The  men  were  driven  off  the  cutter, 
the  prize  was  released,  and  the  revenue  vessel  was  carried 
out  into  the  stream  and  burned.*^ 

Newspapers,  whether  friendly  to  the  embargo  or  opposed 
to  it,  frequently  commented  on  the  lawlessness  of  the  people. 
In  fact,  sections  of  New  England  were  practically  at  war  with 
the  government  authorities.  In  an  action  on  Lake  Champlain 
between  two  sloops  and  a  raft  fourteen  or  fifteen  men  were 
wounded  and  the  raft  escaped.^^  Another  paper,  quoting  a 
Bennington  letter  of  ^lay  8,  but  in  all  probability  describing 
the  same  affair,  said  that  thirty-nine  were  severely  wounded 
and  one  killed.^^  The  opposition  in  the  early  summer  be-  \ 
came  almost  a  rebellion.  A  Rutland  item  of  June  4,  read : 
"A  detachment  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  of  the  militia, 
made  from  the  2nd  brigade,  marched  from  this  vicinity  on 
Tuesday  last,  to  put  a  stop  to  the  disgraceful  potash  and 
lumber  rebellion  on  Lake  Champlain,  "^^ 

At  Middlebury,  Vermont,  a  large  and  valuable  raft  seized 
by  the  government  and  guarded  by  twelve  men  was  attacked 
by  one  hundred  and  fifty  men  from  Canada  and  carried  in. 
Shots  were  exchanged  and  blood  marks  were  found  the  next 
morning.^"  At  St.  Albans,  according  to  a  statement  sworn  to  by 
Lieutenant  John  AVhittemore  at  Staunton  on  July  2,  thirty  men 
fought  twelve  soldiers  in  order  to  regain  twelve  barrels  of 
potash,  and  succeeded.®^ 

A  Quebec  paper,  in  commenting  upon  the  frequent  report 
that  Canadians  aided  in  recapturing  rafts,  said : 

The  raft  which  was  fired  upon  at  'Windmill  Point  by  the  American  guard, 
has  arrived  here.  That  part  of  the  account  given  in  the  St.  Alban's  Ad- 
viser and  copied  into  the  last  Gazette,  which  states  that  the  men  who  car- 
ried off  the  raft  were  collected  in  Canada,  is  false.  The  people  on  hoard 
the  raft  amounted  to  54;  none  of  them  were  wounded  by  the  fire  from 
the  shore,  though  a  great  number  of  balls  were  lodged  in  the  raft.     They 


86  American   Register,   Vol.    V,    p.    241. 
S7  National   Intelligencer,    May    23,    1808. 

88  Norwich  Courier,  June   1,   1808. 

89  National  Intelligencer,  June   17,   1808. 

90  Connecticut   Courant,  June   29,    1808. 

91  Massachusetts   Spy,    or    Worcester   Gazette,    July    27,    1S08. 


116      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

saved  themselves  by  lying  down   behind  logs  placed   for  the  purpose   the 
moment  they  saw  the  flash  from  the  muskets  of  the  people  on  shore.92 

Soldiers  near  Rutland,  Vermont,  on  August  3,  took  posses- 
sion of  a  batteau  supposed  to  be  used  in  smuggling  potash. 
After  threats,  they  were  fired  on  and  one  soldier  was  killed. 
The  batteau,  at  Lieutenant  Farrington's  order,  then  made  for 
the  shore  to  dislodge  the  smugglers.  When  the  men  landed, 
they  were  fired  on  again,  another  soldier  was  killed  and  the 
lieutenant  wounded.  Eight  suspects  were  arrested,  but  four 
escaped.  A  reward  of  one  hundred  dollars  was  offered  for 
S.  I.  Mott,  the  commander  of  the  batteau,  and  of  fifty  dollars 
each  for  the  other  three  suspects.^^ 

At  least  one  rioter  was  executed  for  opposing  the  embargo 
laws  and  firing  on  the  soldiers.  A  widely  copied  item  from 
a  Vermont  paper  read: 

Dean,  the  person  who  was  convicted  of  firing  on  the  soldiers  who  were 
executing  the  Embargo  laws  in  Vermont,  has  suffered  the  sentence  of  the 
law.  He  appeared  perfectly  composed  and  hardened,  denied  his  crime ; 
kicked  his  hat  into  his  grave,  spit  upon  his  coffin;  and  pulled  the  cap 
over  his  eyes  himself.     No  person  prayed  with  him  at  the  gallows.^* 

Boats  were  sometimes  loaded  openly  in  defiance  of  embargo 
laws.  Thus  at  Bath,  Maine,  the  brig  Mary  Jane  put  to  sea 
in  defiance  of  a  revenue  cutter.  The  latter  opened  fire,  but 
the  Mary  Jane  returned  the  shots  and  continued  on  her  way.^'^ 

The  Wasp,  sloop  of  war,  captured  the  schooner,  Liberty, 
a  vessel  engaged  in  smuggling.  One  night,  however,  about 
forty  "Indians"  led  by  Blue  or  Red  Jacket  boarded  the  Liber- 
ty, put  the  Wasp's  officer  and  crew  on  shore  and  took  the 
Liberty  to  put  to  sea.  These  "Indians"  called  themselves 
descendants  of  the  "aborigines"  who  destroyed  the  tea  in 
1773.^^ 

Naturally  the  attitude  of  the  people  was  not  without  effect 
on  the  collectors.  Moreover,  their  sympathies  influenced  their 
official  action.    Thus  we  note  the  following  entry: 


I 


92  Relf's   Philadelphia    Gazette,    and    Daily    Advertiser,    August    8,    1808. 

«3   Boston   Columbian  Centinel,  August  10,   1808;    United  States  Gazette,  August   17, 

1808. 

94    Virginia  Argus,   December   13,   1808. 

9ri  Baltimore   Evening   Post,   January    14,    1809. 

9G  Nev,"   York   Herald,   January    18,    1809. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  117 

Some  of  the  Collectors  at  the  southward  have  grown  more  liberal  in  the 
construction  of  the  Embargo  laws:  others  are  more  strict.  At  Baltimore, 
we  are  told,  coasters  in  ballast  have  been  allowed  to  sail  without  giving 
bonds;  while  in  North  Carolina,  a  coasting  vessel  with  staves,  it  is  said, 
has  been  refused  any  clearance  at  all.  .  .  ^^ 

In  the  North,  cases  of  collusion  were  frequent.  Officers 
winked  at  smuggling  or  made  only  half  hearted  attempts  to 
X^revent  it.^^  Occasionally  officers  were  removed  for  not  using 
due  diligence  in  the  enforcement  of  laws.  Among  this  number 
was  Edward  Pope,  collector  and  inspector  of  the  port  of  New 
Bedford,   Massachusetts.^^ 

Later  on,  because  of  the  pressure  of  public  opinion  or  their 
own  convictions,  collectors  handed  in  their  resignations.  The 
January  papers,  1809,  call  attention  to  these  resignations  which 
grew  out  of  the  embargo  act  of  that  month.  Thus  we  read: 
"On  Sunday  last,  the  new  Embargo  Act  arrived  in  town. 
On  Monday,  our  Collector,  the  venerable  General  Lincoln,  who 
is  now  descending  to  the  grave  with  wounds,  received  in  the 
struggle  for  Freedom;  and  Benjamin  Wild,  Esq.  Deputy  Col- 
lector, both  Resigned  Their  Offi,ces.""°  About  the  same  time, 
January  20,  Colonel  Olney  and  his  brother,  officers  at  Provi- 
dence, Rhode  Island,  resigned  rather  than  try  to  enforce  the 
embargo.^°^  A  week  or  so  later  Michael  Hodge,  surveyor  at 
Newburyport,  Massachusetts,  resigned  for  a  similiar  reason.^"^ 

The  readiness  of  the  Americans  to  violate  the  embargo  laws  v' 
is  also  apparent  from  the  writings  of  spies  and  of  foes  and 
friends  of  the  measure.  John  Howe,  on  May  5,  1808,  wrote 
to  Lieutenant  General  Sir  George  Prevost  of  Canada  on  the 
American  situation.  He  referred  to  the  numerous  shipments 
of  flour  to  Passamaquaddy  and  elsewhere,  and  advised  a  slight 
shifting  of  destination.  He  urged  that  on  the  w^hole,  he  was 
satisfied  that  every  production  of  the  United  States  could  be 
easily  obtained  if  the  British  really  desired  it  and  would  af- 
ford some  facility  and  security  to  the  enterprising  men  who 


97  New   England   Palladium,   June    7,    1808. 

98  Boston   Gazette,  May   19,   1808. 

99  Boston   Independent   Chronicle,    August    18,    1808. 

100  Boston   Reperetory,   January   20,    1809. 

101  Paulson's    American    Daily    Advertiser,    January    26,    1809. 

102  Boston    Reperetory,    January    31,    1809. 


118      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

would  bring  it  m.^°^  A  little  over  a  month  later,  June  7,  he 
referred  in  another  letter  to  Prevost  to  the  ineffectual  attempts 
to  enforce  the  embargo. 

"But  all  he  [Jefferson]  can  do,"  said  the  British  agent,  "will  not  keep 
the  Republican  Lady  honest.  Upwards  of  50,000  barrels  of  flour  have 
been  sent  away  from  this  city  (New  York)  since  the  Embargo  took  place. 
And  I  am  convinced  that  either  here,  or  in  any  part  of  the  Union,  it 
would  be  easy  to  contract  with  individuals  to  furnish  anything  the  country 
produces,  and  to  send  it  where  it  might  be  necessary.  Since  the  King's  last 
Order  in  Council,  which  had  only  been  published  a  few  days  ago,  [the 
order  of  April  11,  1808,  here  referred  to,  instructed  British  naval  officers 
and  other  officials  not  to  interfere  with  any  neutral  vessel  which  was  taking 
lumber  or  provisions  to  the  British  West  Indies], io4  a  sloop  laden  with 
flour  came  down  the  North  River  in  the  night,  passed  boldly  by  their  Gun 
Boats,  and  got  to  sea,  intending  to  go  to  our  Islands  in  the  "West 
Indies.  "103 

In  a  letter  of  June  20,  written  at  Philadelphia,  Howe  de- 
clared: "Among  all  the  Republican  virtues  I  find  in  exercise 
in  this  country,  the  love  of  money  is  by  far  the  most  pre- 
dominant."^*"^ On  August  5,  he  wrote  to  Prevost  from  New 
York  about  a  southern  trip.  After  describing  the  loyalty  of 
the  Southerners  to  Jefferson  in  spite  of  their  suffering,  he 
stated  that  notwithstanding  their  patriotism  they  were  watch- 
ing ;for  every  opportunity  to  violate  the  embargo.  While  at 
Norfolk,  Virginia,  he  had  a  conversation  with  a  captain  who 
had  lately  i-eturned  from  Kingston,  Jamaica.  The  captain  had 
cleared  out  from  Georgetown  to  New  Orleans  with  one  thous- 
and barrels  of  flour.  On  the  way  he  had  met  with  such  bad 
weather  that  he  lost  both  masts  and  injured  his  rudder.  Very 
providentially,  however,  he  met  a  British  war  vessel,  which 
took  him  to  Kingston.  There  he  very  providentially  sold  his 
flour  at  twenty  to  twenty-five  dollars  a  barrel,  got  his  vessel 
condemned  and  sold  her.  He  was  then  on  his  way  to  George- 
toAvn  with  a  long  protest  in  order  to  clear  himself  of  bonds. 

103  "Secret  Reports  of  John  Howe,"  American  Historical  Review,  Vol.  XVII,  pp. 
80,  81.     Howe's  reports,  it  may  be  noted,  are  not  entirely  reliable. 

104  Supra,  pp.   31,   86. 

105  "Secret  Reports  of  John   Howe,"  American  Eisorical  Review,  Vol.  XVII,  p.   91. 

106  Ibid.,   p.    94. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  119 

If  the  providential  disasters   were   accepted,   he   expected   to 
sail  to  Jamaica  again  within  six  weeks."'^ 

On  November  16,  1808,  in  a  letter  from  Boston  to  Prevost, 
Howe  referred  to  the  indignation  over  the  embargo  laws  and 
the  use  of  one  hundred  thousand  militia.  He  again  spoke  of 
the  open  violations  of  the  law.  At  Portland,  he  declared,  a 
ship  and  two  brigs  had  gone  to  sea  with  cargoes  in  open 
defiance  of  the  Wasp,  an  American  ship  sent  there  to  pre- 
vent them.  From  Cape  Ann  several  others  sailed,  he  said.  On  No- 
vember 12,  a  brig  and  another  vessel  loaded  with  fish  left  Cape 
Cod.  The  brig,  he  declared,  was  seen  and  fired  at  by  a  gun- 
boat, but  she  continued  on  her  way  in  defiance.'^°* 

The  writings  of  Jefferson  and  Gallatin  abound  with  referen- 
ces to  law  violations,  and,  incidentally,  show  reasons  for  oppo- 
sition to  the  laws.     Thus,   on  May  16,   1808,  Jefferson  wrote, 
to   Gallatin: 

The  numerous  and  bold  evasions  of  the  several  embargo  laws  threatened 
altogether  to  defeat  the  great  and  interesting  objects  for  which  they  were 
adopted,  and  principally  under  cover  of  the  coasting  trade.  Congress,  there- 
fore, finding  insufficient  all  attempts  to  bind  unprincipled  adventurers  by 
general  rules,  at  length  gave  a  discretionary  power  to  detain  absolutely  all 
vessels  suspected  of  intentions  to  evade  the  embargo  laws,  wheresoever 
found.  In  order  to  give  to  this  law  the  effect  it  intended,  we  find  it 
necessary  to  consider  every  vessel  as  suspicious  which  has  on  board  any 
articles  of  domestic  produce  in  demand  at  foreign  markets,  and  most  es- 
pecially provisions.  .  .  .io9 

In  his  reply  a  Aveek  later,  Gallatin  tried  to  point  out  that 
the  embargo  worked  and  that  the  evasions  were  fewer  than  be 
had  expected.  The  danger,  according  to  him,  was  secret 
bonding  and  departure  without  clearance.  Previous  violations, 
he  held,  had  largely  occurred  in  frontier  districts  or  in  the 
sailing  of  vessels  before  penalties  could  be  enforced.^^° 

On  May  20,  Jefferson  wrote  to  General  Benjamin  Smith 
on  the  subject  of  the  embargo.  He  declared  that  the  question 
of  how  long  the  continuance  of  the  embargo  would  be  prefer- 
able to  war  would  have  to  be  met  if  the  decrees,  orders,  and 


107  Ibid.,    p.    99. 

108  Ibid.,    p.    339. 

109  Gallatin,    Writings,    Vol.    I,    p.    389. 

110  Ibid.,   p.   391. 


120      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

European  wars  continued.     With  regard  to  law  enforcement, 

he  said  : 

I  am  sorry  that  in  some  places,  chiefly  on  our  northern  frontiers,  a  dis- 
position even  to  oppose  the  law  by  force  has  been  manifested.  In  no 
country  on  earth  is  this  so  impracticable  as  in  one  where  every  man  feels 
a  vital  interest  in  maintaining  the  authority  of  the  laws,  and  instantly 
engages  in  it  as  in  his  own  personal  cause.  Accordingly,  we  have  ex- 
perienced this  spontaneous  aid  of  our  good  citizens  in  the  neighborhoods 
where  there  has  been  occasion,  as  I  am  persuaded  we  ever  shall  on  such 
occasions.  Through  the  body  of  our  country  generally  our  citizens  appear 
heartily  to  approve  and  support  the  embargo.  .  .m 

On  June  23,  in  a  letter  to  Dr.  Thomas  Leib,  Jefferson  re- 
ferred to  the  opposition  of  the  Federalists  and  stated  that  the 
time  was  not  far  distant  when  the  embargo  would  have  to 
be  abandoned."-  Nearly  a  month  later,  July  17,  he  wrote  to 
Meriwether  Lewis  that  foreign  affairs  did  not  clear  up  at  all 
and  that  the  moment  would  come  when  the  legislature  would 
have  to  decide  whether  or  not  war  was  preferrable  to  embar- 

gQ      113 

On  July  29  Gallatin  wrote  a  pessimistic  letter  to  Jefferson. 
He  pointed  out  the  various  violations,  particularly  in  the  North, 
the  opposition  of  the  Federalists,  and  the  inadequacy  of  exist- 
ing laws.  He  urged  that  in  order  to  make  the  embargo  ef- 
fective no  vessel  should  be  allowed  to  move  without  the  presi- 
dent's special  permission  and  that  the  collectors  should  be  in- 
vested with  the  power  of  seizing  property  anywhere  and  of 
taking  the  rudders  or  otherwise  effectually  preventing  the  de- 
parture of  any  vessel  without  being  liable  to  personal  suits. 
These  powers  he  considered  absolutely  necessary,  though  he 
admitted  that  they  were  "equally  dangerous  and  odious."  He 
insisted  that  there  was  need  for  a  little  army  along  the  Lakes 
and  British  lines,  for  "selfishness  has  assumed  the  reins  in 
several  quarters,  and  the  people  are  now  there  altogether 
against  the  law."  He  expressed  a  fear  that  they  would  have 
to  give  up  the  embargo,  unless  the  president  was  clothed  "with 
the  most   arbitrary  powers   and   sufficient   force"  to   carry  it 

111  Jefferson,   Writings,  Vol.   IX,   p.    195. 

112  Ibid.,   pp.   196,    197. 

113  Ibid.,   p.   200. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  121 

into  effect.    In  that  case  he  considered  war  inevitable  but  with 
which  power — England  or  France — he  asked.^^* 
On  August  11,  Jefferson  wrote  to  Gallatin: 

This  embargo  law  is  certainly  the  most  embarrassing  one  we  have  ever 
had  to  execute.  I  did  not  expect  a  crop  of  so  sudden  and  rank  growth 
of  fraud  and  open  opposition  by  force  could  have  grown  up  in  the  United 
States.  I  am  satisfied  with  you  that  if  orders  and  decrees  are  not  repealed, 
and  a  continuance  of  the  embargo  is  preferred  to  war,  (which  sentiment 
is  universal  here,)  Congress  must  legalize  all  means  which  may  be  necessary 
to  obtain  its  e/id.ns 

Again  on  December  28,  Gallatin  wrote  to  Jefferson  con- 
concerning  attempts  at  violation  of  the  law.     He  said : 

All  the  cotton  in  New  York  has  been  purchased  by  speculators  in  Boston 
and  they  want  to  transport  it.  A  single  person  wanted  to  ship  six  thou- 
sand bales,  equal  to  1,800,000  pounds.  I  have  written  to  Mr.  Gelston 
not  to-  permit  the  shipment  of  one  bale,  as  there  must  be  a  plan,  though 
the  details  are  not  known,  for  its  being  illegally  exported  from  Boston. 
As  to  Georgia,  I  do  not  perceive  that  anything  more  can  be  done  than  to 
send  gunboats  in  addition  to  our  small  revenue  boats. us 

On  January  17,  1809,  Jefferson  sent  a  circular  letter  through 
the  Secretary  of  War  to  the  various  governors,  empowering 
them  to  use  militia  in  enforcing  the  law.  Although  the  pres- 
sure of  the  embargo  has  been  sensibly  felt,  he  said,  most  people 
had  borne  it  cheerfully  under  the  conviction  that  it  is  a  tem- 
porary and  necessary  evil.  It  would  have  been  borne  more 
cheerfully,  he  declared,  had  it  not  been  violated  by  the  un- 
principled along  the  seacoast  and  frontiers.  In  cases,  he  ob- 
served, armed  forces  "too  powerful  to  be  opposed  by  the  col- 
lector and  his  assistants"  had  set  at  defiance  the  laws. 

A  typical  letter  modeled  after  Jefferson's  circular  letter, 
was  sent  to  the  Governor  of  Virginia  on  the  next  day  by  Hen- 
ry Dearborn,  Secretary  of  War.  After  reciting  the  above  facts, 
he  wrote:  "To  put  an  end  to  this  scandalous  insubordination 
to  the  laws,"  the  act  of  January  9,  authorized  the  president 
"to  empower  persons  to  employ  militia  for  preventing  or  sup- 
pressing armed  or  riotous  assemblages  of  persons  resisting  the 
custom-house  officers  in  the  exercise  of  their  duties,  or  oppos- 


114  Gallatin,    Writings,   Vol.   I,   pp.    396-399. 

115  Jefferson,    Writings,   Vol.    IX,    p.    202. 

116  Gallatin,    Writings,   Vol.   I,   p.   448. 


122      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

ing  or  violating  the  embargo  laws."  Such  restrictions,  the 
president  hoped,  Dearborn  said,  would  last  only  a  short  time. 
He  then  asked  for  the  appointment  of  a  militia  officer  with 
proper  forces  near  each  custom-house  in  order  to  see  that  the 
laws  were  enforced.^^'' 

Six  days  later,  Gallatin  in  an  official  report  turned  in  a  list 
of  fifty-four  places  where  violations  of  the  embargo  had  taken 
place  prior  to  November  14,  1808.  They  were,  beginning 
roughly  at  the  north  and  extending  to  the  south:  Ports- 
mouth, Frenchman's  Bay,  Penobscot,  Waldobow,  Wiscasset, 
Bath,  Portland,  Newburyport,  Ipswich,  Gloucester,  Salem, 
Marblehead,  Boston,  Portsmouth  (Mlass.),  Barnstable.  Newbed- 
ford,  Dighton,  Nantucket,  Edgartown,  Bristol,  Providence, 
Newport,  New  London,  Middletown,  New  Haven,  Fairfield, 
Sacket's  Harbor,  Buffalo  Creek,  Sag  Harbour,  New  York, 
Vienna,  Snow  Hill,  Georgetown,  Alexandria,  Dumfries,  Yeo- 
comics,  Eichmond,  Petersburgh,  Norfolk,  Folly  Landing,  Cher- 
rystone, Camden,  Plymouth  (N.  C),  Oeracock,  Wilmington 
(N.  'C),  Georgetown  (S.  C),  Charleston,  and  St.  Marys. 
Most  of  the  violations  seemed  to  occur  in  the  north  and  cen- 
tral parts,  and  naturally  so,  for  most  of  the  ports  were  there. 
This  report  Gallatin  expressly  stated  Avas  not  complete. 

' '  But  numerous  evasions  and  violations, ' '  he  said,  ' '  have  taken  place ;  of 
which  the  official  returns  of  the  collectors  herewith  transmitted,  give  but 
a  partial  account,  although  this  communication  was  delayed  in  order  to 
obtain  the  information  required  by  the  latter  part  of  the  resolution  of  the 
house.  For  it  cannot  be  concealed  that  illegal  shipments  and  exportations 
of  potash,  flour  and  cotton  and  other  articles,  have  been  made  to  a  much 
larger  amount  than  might  be  inferred  from  a  view  of  those  returns,  "us 

Any  law  to  be  effective  must  have  the  backing  of  the  people ; 
otherwise  violations  will  be  encouraged,  judges  may  refuse  to 
convict,  and  juries  will  release.  In  the  summer  of  1808  some 
Charleston  merchants  with  the  consent  of  the  collector  and 
district  attorney  applied  for  a  mandamus  to  compel  the 
collector  to  clear  certain  ships  for  Baltimore.  The  collector 
admitted    his   belief   that   the   voyage    was   intended    in    good 

117  Jefferson,  Writings,  Vol.  IX,  p.  237;  and  Calendar  of  Ya.  State  Papers  &,  Other 
Mss.,    Vol.    X,    pp.    42,    43. 

118  American   Register,   Vol.   V,   p.    85. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  123 

faith  and  that  under  the  embargo  law  he  had  no  right  of 
detention;  he  then  placed  Gallatin's  instructions  before  the 
court.  The  case  was  turned  over  without  argument  to  Justice 
William  Johnson  of  the  South  Carolina  circuit.  Although 
Johnson  was  the  appointee  and  a  warm  personal  friend  of 
Jefferson,  he  decided  that  the  act  of  Congress  did  not  warrant 
detention  and  that  consequently,  without  the  sanction  of  law 
the  collector  was  not  justified  by  instructions  from  the  execu- 
tive in  increasing  commercial  restraints.  The  mandamus  was 
issued. 

This  decision  worried  Jefferson.  On  July  18,  he  wrote  Gov- 
ernor Pinckney  of  South  Carolina:  "I  saw  them  with  great 
concern  because  of  the  quarter  from  whence  they  came,  and 
where  they  could  not  be  abscribed  to  any  political  wayward- 
ness. "^^^  Rodney,  Jefferson's  Attorney  General,  tried  to  over- 
rule Johnson's  decision,  and  under  the  president's  instructions 
wrote  "an  official  opinion  that  the  court  had  no  power  to  issue 
a  mandamus  in  such  a  case."  By  publishing  this  opinion  in 
the  newspapers,  towards  the  end  of  July  he  forced  Johnson 
into  a  newspaper  controversy  in  which  the  judge  defended  his 
opinion  temperately  and  with  satisfaction  to  himself,  but  he 
never  regained  Jefferson's  good  opinion.  In  his  own  circuit 
the  Georgia  grand  jury  in  December  "made  him  the  object 

of  a  presentment  for  improper  interference  with  the  Execu- 
tive, "^^o 

Jefferson  derived  encouragement,  however,  from  an  unex- 
pected quarter.  In  September  an  embargo  ease  was  argued 
before  John  Davis,  judge  of  the  district  court  for  Massachu- 
setts. Samuel  Dexter,  the  ablest  lawyer  in  New  England, 
urged  the  constitutional  objections  to  the  embargo  with  great 
force.  Newspapers  were  decrying  the  law.  Chief  Justice  Par- 
sons of  the  Massachusetts  Supreme  Court,  the  best  legal  au- 


119  Works,  Vol.  V,  p.  322,  Quoted  in  Adams,  Henry,  History  of  the  United  States, 
Vol.  IV,  p.  264. 

120  Ibid.,  pp.  263,  264.  The  papers  of  the  period  are,  of  course,  full  of  remarks 
on  the  constitutionality  of  the  embargo,  and  decisions  in  embargo  cases.  The  answer 
of  Judge  Johnson  to  the  publication  of  the  Attorney  General's  letter  to  the  President 
on  the  subject  of  the  mandamus  was  dated  August  26.  It  was  published  in  northern 
papers,  as  the  Massachusetts  Spy,  or  Worcester  Gazette  of  November  16,  23,  and  30, 
1808. 


124      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

thority  in  the  state,  cast  his  private  influence  against  the  law. 
Nevertheless,  Judge  Davis,  one  of  the  soundest  of  Federalists 
declared  that  the  law  was  constitutional.     He  said: 

Stress  has  been  laid  in  argument  on  the  word  ' '  regulate ' '  as  implying  in 
itself  a  limitation.  Power  to  "regulate"  it  is  said,  cannot  be  understood 
to  give  a  power  to  annihilate.  To  this  it  may  be  replied  that  the  acts  under 
consideration,  though  of  very  ample  extent,  do  not  operate  as  a  prohibition 
of  all  foreign  commerce.  It  will  be  admitted  that  partial  prohibitions  are 
authorized  by  the  expression;  and  how  shall  the  degree  or  extent  of  the 
prohibition  be  adjusted  but  by  the  discretion  of  the  national  government, 
to  whom  the  subject  appears  to  be  committed.121 

After  invoking  the  "necessary  and  proper"  clause,  Davis 
passed  on  to  the  doctrine  of  "inherent  sovereignity."  He 
said: 

Further,  the  power  to  regulate  commerce  is  not  to  be  confined  to  the 
adoption  of  measures  exclusively  beneficial  to  commerce  itself,  or  tending 
to  its  advancement;  but  in  our  national  system,  as  in  all  modern  sovereign- 
ties, it  is  also  to  be  considered  as  an  instrument,  for  other  purposes  of 
general  policy  and  interest.  The  mode  of  its  management  is  a  consideration 
of  great  delicacy  and  importance;  but  the  national  right  or  power  to  adapt 
regulations  of  commerce  to  other  purposes  than  the  mere  advancement  of 
commerce  appears  to  me  unquestionable.122 

Congress  has  power  [he  said]  in  discussing  necessity  of  state,  to  declare 
war.  It  of  course  has  power  to  prepare  for  war;  and  the  time,  the  manner 
and  the  measure  in  the  application  of  constitutional  means,  seem  to  be  left 
to  its  wisdom  and  discretion.  Foreign  intercourse  becomes  in  such  times 
a  subject  of  peculiar  interest,  and  its  regulation  forms  an  obvious  and 
essential  branch  of  federal  administration.  .  .  It  seems  to  have  been  ad- 
mitted in  the  argument  that  State  necessity  might  justify  a  limited  em- 
bargo, or  suspension  of  all  foreign  commerce;  but  if  Congress  have  the 
power,  for  purpose  of  safety,  of  preparation,  or  counteraction,  to  suspend 
commercial  intercourse  with  foreign  nations,  M'here  do  we  find  them  limited 
as  to  the  duration  more  than  as  to  the  manner  and  extent  of  the  measure  ?i-'3 

Dexter  did  not  appeal  from  the  decision,  for  he  knew  that 
John  Marshall  would  support  it.  The  judgment,  nevertheless, 
rankled.  Even  Joseph  Story,  later  on  a  convert  to  Marshall's 
views,  wrote:  "I  have  ever  considered  the  embargo  a  meas- 
ure  which  went  to   the   utmost   limits   of   constructive   power 


121  Adams,  Henry,  History  of  the  United  States,  Vol.  IV,  p.  268. 

122  Ibid.,   p.    269. 

123  Jbid.,   pp.    269,    270. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  125 

under  the  Constitution,  being  in  its  very  form  and  terms  an 
unlimited  prohibition  or  suspension  of  foreign  commerce. '  '^"* 

On  September  14,  Gallatin  wrote  Jefferson  concerning  the 
difficulty  of  instituting  prosecutions  in  northern  New  York.^-'^ 
On  December  21,  1808,  John  Quincy  Adams  wrote  Ezekiel  Ba- 
con in  favor  of  substituting  something  else  for  the  embargo 
as  quickly  as  possible  on  the  score  that  the  law  would  not  be 
executed.  State  authority,  he  urged,  would  oppose  the  law 
notwithstanding  the  decision  of  Judge  Davis,  juries  would  not 
convict,  constitutional  objections  would  recur  with  ten-fold 
greater  power,  and  soon  state  judges  would  decide  in  their  own 
way.^^^  On  January  16,  1809,  he  wrote  to  \Yilliam  Branch 
Giles  as  follows: 

You  will  have  been  informed  that  two  instances  of  forcible  violations 
of  the  embargo  laws  have  occurred  at  the  two  extremities  of  our  sea  coast 
within  this  Commonwealth.  The  district  court  after  sitting  seven  or  eight 
weeks,  and  trying  upwards  of  forty  cases,  has  at  length  adjourned.  Not 
one  instance  has  occurred  of  a  conviction  by  jury,  and  finally  one  of  the 
jurymen  is  said  to  have  declared  that  he  never  would  agree  to  convict  any 
person  under  these  laws  whatever  might  be  the  facts.  The  judge  has  been 
firm  and  decided  in  support  of  the  laws,  as  far  as  his  authority  extended. 127 

Gallatin,  on  November  24,  in  advising  the  committee  of 
which  W.  B.  Giles  was  chairman,  had  referred  to  the  vexa- 
tious suits  which  were  brought  against  collectors  for  the  pur- 
pose of  bothering  them  and  of  intimidating  others  from  the 
discharge  of  their  duties.  He  referred  also  to  the  attempts 
made  to  take  from  collectors  "by  writs  of  replevin  issued  by 
state  courts  or  officers,"  property  seized  in  conformity  with 
the  embargo  laws.  He  declared,  moreover,  that  vessels  and 
cargoes  had  been  "restored  to  the  owners  on  their  giving  se- 
curity for  the  appraised  value"  at  an  amount  "so  Ioav  as  to 
reduce  the  forfeitui-e  to  an  inconsiderable  sum,  thereby  defeat- 
ing altogether  the  law.  "^^^ 

The  act  of  January  9,  1809  was  intended  to  make  it  diffi- 
cult   for    collectors    and    others    charged    with    enforcing    the 


124  Story  W.  W.,  Life  and  Letters  of  Joseph  Story,  Vol.  I,  p.  185. 

125  Gallatin,    Writings,   Vol.    I,    p.   417. 

126  Adams,    J.    Q.,    Writings,   Vol.    Ill,    pp.    277,    279. 

127  Ihid.,   pp.    287,   288. 

128  American  Register,  Vol.   IV,   pp.   266,    267. 


126      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

embargo  laws  to  be  prosecuted  and  persecuted  in  the  discharge 
of  their  duties.  That  it  did  not  fully  succeed  numerous  in- 
stances could  prove,  but  the  following  one  must  suffice.  A  man 
by  the  name  of  Charles  Bean  was  appointed  captain  of  militia 
by  Levi  Lincoln,  Lieutenant  Governor  of  Massachusetts,  on 
February  1,  1809.  Four  weeks  later,  February  26,  he  received 
a  letter  from  Alexander  Mclntire,  collector  at  York,  asking 
him  to  go  on  board  a  ship  named  Beckey,  which  was  suspected 
of  an  intention  to  violate  the  embargo  laws,  and  detain  her 
temporarily.  Accompanied  by  six  private  soldiers  and  deputy 
inspector  David  Barker,  he  obeyed  the  instructions.  No  vio- 
lence was  committed,  but  a  half  hour  after  the  company 
entered  the  vessel,  William  Boyd,  the  reputed  owner,  came 
on  board  and  ordered  them  off  with  harsh  language.  At  the 
same  time  he  threatened  to  raise  a  mob  to  take  the  vessel  by 
force  if  the  men  did  not  leave.  The  authorities,  however,  re- 
mained on  board  till  the  tide  had  ebbed  so  much  that  it  was 
impossible  for  the  boat  to  leave. 

Two  days  later  these  authorities  were  arrested  on  a  warrant 
issued  by  Daniel  Sewall  for  a  riot  in  entering  the  Beckey,  and 
the  next  day  they  were  carried  before  Jacob  Fisher  of  Kenne- 
bunk,  twenty  miles  from  York,  though  there  were  at  least  eight 
magistrates  of  competent  jurisdiction  in  York.  Justice  Fisher 
declared  the  embargo  laws  unconstitutional,  the  order  of  Lin- 
coln illegal,  and  required  each  man  to  give  surety  of  fifty 
dollars  that  he  would  put  in  an  appearance  at  the  superior 
court  at  York.  After  attending  this  court  for  thirteen  days, 
they  were  discharged  by  the  grand  jury.  For  the  time  and 
trouble  occasioned  by  this  interference  Bean  put  in  a  claim 
of  $219.44,  which  the  committee  considered  reasonable.^^^ 

Opposition  to  the  embargo,  of  course,  showed  one  of  its 
manifestations  in  an  attempt  to  drive  the  Republicans  out  of 
office.  Newspapers,  open  air  political  meetings,  etc.  were  used 
in  such  an  effort.  One  of  Bryant's  poems  written  when  he 
was  only  fourteen  years  old,  shows  the  feeling  prevalent  in  his 
native  village : 


129  American  State   Papers,   Class  IX,   Claims,   Vol.   XIX,   pp.   382,   383. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  127 

Curse  of  our  nation,  source  of  countless  woes, 
From  whose  dark  womb  unreckoned  misery  flows: 
Th'  embargo  rages,  like  a  sweeping  wing. 
Fear  lowers  before,  and  famine  stalks  behind 

And  thou,  the  scorn  of  every  patriot's  name, 
Thy  country's  ruin  and  her  council's  shame! 
Poor  servile  thing!     Derision  of  the  brave! 
Who  erst  from  Tarleton  fled  to  Carter's  cave, 
Thou  who  when  menaced  by  perfidious  Gaul 
Didst  prostrate  to  her  whiskered  minions  fall ; 
And  when  our  cash  her  empty  bags  supplied 
Didst  meanly  strive  the  foul  disgrace  to  hide ; 
Go,  search  with  curious  eyes  for  horned  frogs, 
Mid  the  wild  waste  of  Louisiana  bogs; 
Or  where  Ohio  rolls  his  turbid  stream 
Dig  for  huge  bones,  thy  glory  and  thy  theme. 

But  quit  to  abler  hands  the  helm  of  state 
Nor  image  ruin  on  thy  country 's  fate.  .  .i3o 

The  use  of  poetry  to  attack  the  embargo  was  not  confined 
to  the  North.  The  last  stanza  of  a  poem  written  and  used  in 
Charleston,  South  Carolina,  is  worth  quoting: 

Then  hail  Columbia!  happy  land!   and  hail  ye  Heav'n  born  sages! 
Your  wise  Emliargo  long  shall  stand  in  fame's  immortal  pages; 
Long-winded   Madison  shall   prate   of   British  usurpation. 
Till  XXX  blow  the  blockheads  up  and  save  a  sinking  nation.i3i 

Jefferson,  like  many  people  of  the  present  day,  appeared  to 
live  for  applause,  but  little  came  to  him  or  his  measures  from 
New  England.  Ridiculed  in  newspapers,  denounced  in  public 
assemblies  and  in  song,  he  persisted  long  in  his  efforts  to  save 
his  favorite  child  in  spite  of  the  dangers  to  himself  and 
party.  A  song  composed  bj''  Henry  Mullen  of  Dover,  New 
Hampshire,  and  sung  there  at  the  fourth  of  July  celebration 
in  1808,  showed  the  characteristic  New  England  attitude,  and 
consequently,  though  rather  long,  is  quoted  in  entirety: 


130  Embargo.     Quoted  in  Muzzey,  David,   Thomas  Jefferson,  p.   278. 

131  Boston   Reperetory,    September   2,    1808.    "XXX"    stand   for   Pinckney,    Pickering, 
Randolph,    etc. 


128      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

Dear  sirs,  it  is  wrong 
To  demand  a  new  song; 

I  have  let  all  the  breath  I  can  spare  go; 
With  the  Muse  I've  conferr'd, 
And  she  won't  say  a  word, 

But  keeps  laughing  about  the  Embargo. 

I  wish  that  I  could 
Sing  in  Allegro  mood; 

But  the  times  are  as  stupid  as  Largo; 
Could  I  have  my  choice, 
I  would  strain  up  my  voice. 

Till  it  snapt  all  the  strains  of  Embargo. 

Our  great  politicians, 
Those  dealers  in  visions, 

On  paper,  to  all  lengths  they  dare  go 
But  when  call'd  to  decide, 
Like  a  turtle  they  hide 

In  their  own  pretty  shell,  the  Embargo. 

In  the  times  that  we  try 
To  put  out  Britain's  eye 

I  fear  we  shall  let  our  own  pair  go; 
Yet  still  we're  so  wise. 
We  can  see  with  French  eyes 

And  then  we  shall  like  the  Embargo. 

A  French  privateer 

Can  have  nothing  to  fear; 

She  may  load  and  may  here  or  may  there  go; 
Their  friendship  is  such. 
And  we  love  them  so  much, 

We  let  them  slip  thru'  the  Embargo. 

Our  ships,  all  in  motion. 
Once  whitened  the  ocean, 

They  sail'd  and  return 'd  with  a  cargo; 
Now  doom'd  to  decay 
They  have  fallen  a  prey 

To  Jefferson,  worms,  and  Embargo. 

Lest  Britain  should  take 
A  few  men  by  mistake. 

Who  under  false  colours  may  dare  go; 
We're  manning  their  fleet 
With  our  Tars  who  retreat 

From  poverty,  sloth,  and  Embargo. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  129 

What  a  fuss  we  have  made 
About  rights  and  free  trade, 

And  swore  we  'd  not  let  our  own  share  go ; 
Now  we  can't  for  our  souls 
Bring  a  Hake  from  the  shoals 

'Tis  a  breach  of  the  twentieth  Embargo. 

Our  farmers  so  gay, 
How  they  gallop 'd  away, 

'Twas  money  that  made  the  old  mare  go. 
But  now  she  won't  stir 
For  the  whip  or  the  spur, 

Till  they  take  off  her  clog,  the  Embargo. 

If  you  ask  for  a  debt, 
The  man  turns  in  a  pet; 

I  pay.  Sir?     I'll  not  let  a  hair  go; 
If  your  officer  comes, 
I  shall  put  up  my  thumbs. 

And  clap  on  his  breath  an  Embargo. 

Thus  Tommy  destroys 

A  great  part  of  our  joys; 

Yet  we'll  not  let  the  beautiful  fair  go; 
They  all  will  contrive 
To  keep  Commerce  alive. 

There's  nothing  they  hate  like  Embargo. 

Since  rulers  design 
To  deprive  us  of  wine, 

Tis  best  that  we  now  have  a  rare  go; 
Then  each  to  his  post. 
And  see  who  will  do  most 

To  knock  out  the  blocks  of  Evibargo.^^^ 


132  Port   Folio,    Vol.    VT,    No.    5,    p.    80.      Saturday,    July    30,    1808.      This   poem   is 
also   found   in   the    Boston   Reperetory   of   July    15,    1808. 


CHAPTER  VI 

GROWING  OPPOSITION  TO  EMBARGO  FINALLY 
FORCES  REPEAL 

That  Jefferson  considered  the  possible  effects  of  the  embargo 
on  the  political  future  of  his  party  is  apparent  from  his  writ- 
ings, but  that  he  was  determined  to  persist  in  spite  of  its 
possible  influence  on  the  coming  presidental  election  in  No- 
vember of  1808  is  even  more  apparent.  His  letter  of  August 
11,  1808,  to  Gallatin,  already  quoted,  refers  to  "embarrass- 
ments" arising  from  the  embargo,  but,  nevertheless,  explicitly 
states  that  "Congress  must  legalize  all  means"  necessary  to 
enforce  the  embargo.^  That  letter  was  written  only  five  days 
after  Gallatin  had  written  him  that  if  the  embargo  were  not 
raised  before  the  first  of  October  they  would  lose  the  presi- 
dential election.  The  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  declared  that 
the  western  states,  and  Virginia,  South  Carolina,  and  Georgia 
were  the  only  sound  states.  In  every  other  one,  he  said,  they 
would  have  a  doubtful  contest.^  There  is  little  doubt  in  the 
mind  of  the  present  writer  that  this  fear  of  Federalist  suc- 
cess was  one  of  the  "embarrassments"  Jefferson  had  in  mind 
when  he  penned  the  letter  of  August  11.  Gallatin's  letter, 
in  turn,  might  have  been  influenced  by  one  he  received  from 
Eobert  Smith,  dated  Baltimore,  August  1.     Smith  had  written: 

Most  fervently  ought  we  to  pray  to  be  relieved  from  the  various  em- 
barrassments of  this  said  embargo.  Upon  it  there  will,  in  some  of  the 
States,  in  the  course  of  the  next  two  months,  assuredly  be  engendered 
monsters.  Would  that  we  could  be  placed  upon  proper  ground  for  calling 
in  this  mischief -making  busybody.3 

John  Howe,  the  British  agent,  who  was  a  very  keen  ob- 
server, wrote  to  Prevost  on  June  22,  that  the  Federalists  had 
a  good  chance  to  win  New  Jersey.*     On  August  5,  however, 

1  Jefferson,    Writings,   Vol.    IX,   p.    202. 

2  Gallatin,    Writings,  Vol.   I,   p.   402. 

3  Adams,    Henry,   Life   of  Albert    Gallatin,   p.    373. 

4  American  Historical  Review,  Vol.   17,   pp.   93,   94. 

130 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO.  1807-1809  131 

after  the  completion  of  a  southern  trip,  he  wrote  that  the 
Federalists  were  deceiving  themselves  in  expecting  success  in 
North  Carolina,  South  Carolina,  and  Georgia,  for,  though  suf- 
fering from  the  embargo,  the  people  had  "the  most  bitter 
enmity  to  Great  Britain."  Later  on,  in  this  same  letter,  he 
declared  that  he  could  not  see  Federalist  success  south  of 
Pennsylvania.''  Afterwards,  from  Boston,  in  an  undated  letter 
probably  written  about  election  time,  Howe  declared  that  the 
embargo  had  "completely  federalized  all  the  New  England 
states. ' '® 

Howe  proved  a  better  prophet  than  Gallatin.  Massachusetts, 
it  is  true,  early  relapsed  to  Federalism  and  Senator  John 
Quincy  Adams  was  overthrown  in  the  spring  of  1808.  The 
Federalists  also  made  gains  in  New  York  in  the  spring  elec- 
tions. New  Hampshire  and  Rhode  Island  chose  electors  by 
popular  vote;  by  fair  majorities  they  cast  their  votes  for 
Pinckney  in  place  of  Madison.  In  Massachusetts  and  Connecti- 
cut, Federalist  electors  were  chosen  by  the  legislatures.  Early 
in  September  Vermont  elected  a  Federalist  governor,  but  the 
"rotten  boroughs"  of  the  state  were  numerous  enough  to 
enable  the  legislature  to  choose  electors  pledged  to  ]\Iiadison.  If 
Vermont  had  been  counted  as  she  voted  in  September,  the 
Federalists  would  have  received  forty-five  electoral  votes  in 
New  England,  whereas  they  only  received  nine  in  1804.  In 
New  York  the  opponents  of  the  embargo  were  strong,  and  in 
a  popular  vote  nineteen  electors  might  have  been  wrested  from 
Madison.  In  that  case  Pennsylvania's  vote  would  have  been 
decisive.  Maryland  and  North  Carolina  were  close  and  might 
have  followed  Pennsylvania's  lead.  The  result,  however,  was 
already  decided.  Pennsylvania  voted  for  Madison.  Simon 
Snyder  was  chosen  governor  by  a  majority  of  twenty  thous- 
and. Monroe  withdrew  from  the  contest  and  thus  kept  Vir- 
ginia's vote  from  being  divided.  DeWitt  Clinton  contented 
himself  with  depriving  Madison  of  six  of  New  York's  elector- 
al   votes    and    casting    them    for    his    uncle,    George    Clinton, 

5  Ibid.,    pp.    99-102. 

6  Ibid.,   pp.    332,    333. 


132      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

the  vice  president.  The  true  results  of  the  election  were 
thus  not  apparent,  but  the  Republican  votes  fell  from  162  in 
1804  to  122  in  1808,  the  Federalist  minority  increasing  from 
14  to  47J 

On  January  21,  1809,  Jefferson,  in  his  letter  to  Thomas 
Leiper,  admitted  that  the  Federalist  charges,  growing  out  of 
the  embargo  policy,  that  he  Avanted  to  destroy  commerce  by 
adopting  a  Chinese  policy,  had  done  "much  to  federalize  New 
England."*  Later,  on  March  8,  1809,  he  went  further  in  his 
letter  to  William  Short.  He  said:  "Our  embargo  has  worked 
hard.  It  has  in  fact  federalized  three  of  the  New  England 
States.    Connecticut  you  know  was  so  before. '  '^ 

The  New  England  towns,  of  course,  had  an  excellent  way 
of  showing  their  dissatisfaction  by  means  of  town  meetings. 
These  were  numerous  at  all  times  and  great  indignation  was 
expressed  against  the  embargo,  Jefferson,  and  the  Republicans. 
On  March  25,  1808,  Benjamin  Tallmadge,  a  Connecticut  mem- 
ber of  the  national  House  of  Representatives,  wrote  to  James 
McHenry,  former  Secretary  of  War  under  Washington  and 
Adams : 

The  Spirit  of  '76  seems  to  be  again  breaking  out  in  New  England.  In 
Northampton  the  people  have  assembled  and  voted  on  public  measures 
like  free  men,  &  have  recommended  similar  meetings  through  the  country. 
In  the  State  of  New  Hampshire,  the  dominant  party  begins  to  take  back 
Ground,  &  hopes  are  entertained  that  the  Embargo  may  prove  an  useful 
medicine.  If  these  primary  Asseinblies  should  begin  to  act  with  vigor,  my 
word  for  it,  the  higher  constituted  Authorities  will  feel  their  Influence.i" 

On  Saturday  morning,  the  26th,  he  added  the  following: 

P.  S.  Since  I  wrote  the  foregoing,  I  have  procured  a  No.  Hampton 
paper  which  I  will  enclose  for  your  perusal.  A  letter  from  a  Gentleman 
at  N.  Hampton,  just  i-ecd.  remarks  that,  in  consequence  of  the  Notification 
expressed  in  the  4th  vote,  Meetings  had  been  legally  warned  &  held  through 
Hampshire  County  (of  which  No.  Hampton  is  the  County  Town)  &  that 
between  50  &  60  Towns  had  united  to  petition  Congress  etc.  etc.  These 
petitions  may  soon  be  expected  at  the  seat  of  Government.     As  soon 'as 


7  Adams,    Henry,    History    of    the    United    States,    Vol.    IV,    pp.    283-287.      For    the 
completely  tabulated  vote,   see  Stanwood,  History  of  the  Presidency,  Vol.  I,  p.   95. 

8  Jefferson,    Writings,   Vol.    IX,    p.    239. 

9  Ibid.,  p.  249. 

10  Steiner,    B.   C,    The    Life    and   Correspondence    of   James   McHenry,    Secretary   of 
War  under   Washington  and  Adams,   p.    546. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARC40,  1807-1809  133 

these  Events  are  made  known  I  presume  the  Majority  will  begin  to  talk 
about  an  Adjournment  of  Congress  etc.^i 

Inflaminatory  notices  early  appeared  in  the  newspapers  and 
urged  the  meetings  to  which  Tallmadge  referred.  One  of  these, 
signed  by  a  coaster,  read : 

AROUSE  —  AWAKE ! 

How  long  are  the  Inhabitants  of  Massachusetts  to  remain  in  their  present 
quiescent  state!  Why  do  not  the  citizens  assemble  and  express  their 
sentiments  upon  the  measures  of  the  Government,  in  a  firm,  dignified  and 
constitutional  manner! 

An  Embargo  Upon  Our  Coasting  Trade ! !  No  vessel  above  Twenty  Tons 
to  go  from  Port  to  Port ! ! ! ! 

Forbid  it,  ye  Citizens  of  the  extensive  Sea  Coast  of  Massachusetts; 
arouse,  arouse  from  your  lethargy,  assemble  in  your  different  towns,  and 
convey  your  Will  to  your  Servants  in  Congress.12 

The  National  Intelligencer  carried  a  department  under  the 
title  Quern  Deus  Vult  Perdere,  Prius  Dementat  in  which  it 
quoted  from  radical  anti-administration  newspapers.  The  New 
York  Commercial  Advertiser  was  represented  as  saying: 

They  [the  people]  are  quitting  with  precipitation  the  whitened  sepulchre 
of  all  unhinging  democracy,  that  slaughter-house  of  true  liberty,  inhabited 
only  by  the  blood-stained  ghosts  of  Eobespiere,  Marat,  etc.  to  enter  once 
again  into  the  temple  of  truth,  candor  and  federalism,  where  the  paternal 
shade  of  Washington  with  anxious  solicitude,  beckons  their  approach,  and 
with  characteristic  benignity  welcomes  their  return  to  their  father's 
mansion,  from  which  in  an  evil  hour  they  had  strayed.is 

Petitions  and  memorials  prepared  in  or  as  a  result  of  town 
meetings  came  to  Congress  and  Jefferson.  The  memorial  of 
St.  Albans  has  already  been  considered.  Only  one  other  of 
the  petitions  or  meetings  following  the  early  embargo  acts 
will  be  considered  here.  That  meeting  was  held  in  Boston 
at  Faneuil  Hall,  August  9.  Jonathan  Mason  offered  a  motion 
that  it  was  expedient  to  petition  the  president  to  suspend  the 
embargo  wholly  or  partially  in  accordance  with  the  powers 
vested  in  him  by  Congress,  and,  if  he  had  any  doubts  about 
the  matter,  that  he  call  Congress  together  as  soon  as  possi- 
ble.    The  motion  also  included  the  appointment  of  a  committee 


11  Ihid.,    p.    546. 

12  Boston    Gazette,    March    18,    1808. 

13  National    Inlelligencer,    August    1,    1S08. 


134      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

of  seven  to  prepare  and  submit  to  the  town  a  memorial. 
After  a  spirited  debate,  Mason's  resolution  passed  by  a  big 
majority.  At  four  o'clock  the  following  memorial  was  passed 
almost  unanimously: 

That  uniformly  influenced  by  a  sense  of  Patriotism,  &  a  respect  for 
the  Constituted  Authorities  of  their  Country,  they  have  sustained  without 
opposition  or  complaint  the  embarrassments  &  losses  arising  from  the  ex- 
isting embargo  on  the  vessels  &  export  trade  of  the  United  States;  and 
they  trust  that  the  history  of  the  revolutionary  war,  &  the  annals  of  the 
present  government  will  furnish  ample  testimony  of  their  readiness  to 
make  any  personal  sacrifice  &  to  endure  any  privations  which  the  public 
welfare  may  truly  require. 

That  they  are  fully  aware  of  the  indispensable  necessity  of  supporting 
at  all  times  the  laws  enacted  by  the  Government  of  their  choice.  Under 
this  impression  they  have  refrained  from  expressing  the  wishes  they  most 
sensibly  feel  for  the  removal  of  the  Embargo,  &  but  for  the  great  events 
in  Europe  [revolutions  in  Spain  driving  out  French]  which  materially 
change  the  aspect  of  our  foreign  relations,  they  would  yet  silently  wait  for 
the  Meeting  of  Congress,  in  the  hope  of  obtaining  from  that  Honorable 
Body  relief  from  the  pressure  of  this  great  calamity,  which  bears  with 
peculiar  weight  on  the  Eastern  States. 

Denied  by  nature  those  valuable  &  luxuriant  Staples  which  constitute 
the  riches  of  the  south,  they  necessarily  owe  much  of  their  prosperity 
under  the  Blessing  of  Heaven  to  their  own  enterprise  &  Industry  on  the 
Ocean.  .  . 

They  therefore  pray  that  the  Embargo  in  whole  or  in  part  may  be  sus- 
pended according  to  the  powers  vested  in  the  President  by  the  Congress 
of  the  United  States,  &  if  any  doubt  should  exist  of  the  competency  of 
those  powers  they  would  humbly  request  that  the  Congress  may  be  con- 
vened as  early  as  possible,  for  the  purpose  of  taking  the  subject  into  their 
consideration.14 

The  selectmen  were  then  appointed  to  transmit  the  petition 
to  the  president,  and  also  to  communicate  their  action  to  the 
other  towns  of  Massachusetts,  "and  to  request  them,  if  they 
see  fit,  to  lay  the  same  before  their  several  Towns  for  their 
concurrence. '  '^^ 

Canon,  Barnstable,  Lynn,  Watertown,  Bridgewater,  Roches- 
ter, Tisbury,  Noblesborough,  Scarboro,  Monmouth,  Limington, 
Standish,  Parsonsfield,  New  York,  Wrentham,  Salem,  Wor- 
cester,    Pittstown     (Me.).      Newburyport    and    other    towns 


14  A   Volume  of  Records  Relating  to  the  Early  History  of  Boston  containing  Boston 
Town  Records  1796  to  1813,  pp.  237-239. 

15  IMd.,  p.  239.     See  also  Massachusetts  Spy  or  Worcester  Gazette,  August  17,  1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  135 

through  selectmen,  town  meetings,  or  specially  called  meetings 
of  citizens  failed  to  follow  Boston's  advice.^^ 

On  the  other  ,hand,  numerous  towns  as  Portland,  Ports- 
mouth, Hamilton,  Wcnham,  Ipswich,  Beverly,  Sterling,  Lan- 
caster, Northborough,  Rutland,  Leominster,  Petersham,  Bright- 
on, Somerset,  Duxbury,  Waldoborough,  Bolton,  Warren,  Sans- 
ford,  Gorham,  and  Yassalborro  condemned  the  embargo.  The 
Federal  Republicans  of  Norfolk  district  at  Dedham  on  October 
4  did  likewise.  Two  days  later  an  Essex  county  meeting 
(representing  Salem,  Beverly,  Newburyport,  Ipswich,  Newbury, 
Lynn,  Gloucester,  Rowley,  Salisbury,  Wenham,  Manchester, 
Haverhill,  Bradford,  Boxford,  JMethuen,  Middleton,  Andover, 
^Marblehead,  Topsfield,  Danvers,  and  Hamilton)  held  at  Tops- 
field  condemned  the  embargo.  New  Bedford,  Augusta,  Bel- 
fast, Douglas,  and  Plymouth  were  also  numbered  among  the 
numerous  towns  showing  sympathy  for  Boston.^^ 

English  newspapers,  carefully  watching  American  news, 
noted  this  growing  opposition.  ''In  America,  the  operation  of 
the  embargo  seems  to  be  severely  deprecated  by  almost  all 
descriptions  of  people,"  remarked  one,  ''and  the  numerous 
petitions  for  its  revocation,  which  are  assailing  the  President 
from  every  commercial  town  in  the  States,  will  probably  lead 
to  its  removal,  or  to  more  serious  consequences.  .  ."^^  Over 
a  month  later  the  same  paper  remarked : 

The  American  people  suffer  so  much  from  the  Embargo  that  they  speak 
to  their  Government  for  its  revocation  in  a  language  which  must  be  heard. 
The  opposition  to  the  measures  of  the  President  ceases  to  be  the  clamor 
of  a  party ;  it  has  become  the  voice  of  the  nation,  and  is  every  day  more 
strongly  and  more  decidedly  expressed.  .  .lo 

A  radical  New  Orleans  paper  vigorously  attacked  the  embar- 
go and  its  supplemental  measures  which  were  designated  as 
troughs.     The  editor  pointed   out    the   harmful  effect   on  the 


16  Independent  Chronicle,   September   1,   and  22,   1808. 

17  Massachusetts  Spy  or  Worcester  Gazette,  August  24  and  September  7,  1808; 
Neiv  England  Palladium,  September  16,  1808;  Boston  Reperetory,  October  14,  1808. 
See  also  McMaster,  J.  B.  History  of  the  People  of  the  United  States,  Vol.  Ill,  pp. 
312,    313. 

IS  Independent   Whig,   October   16,   1808. 
19  Ibid.,    November    27,    1808. 


136  -    IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

rich  man's  palace,  the  poor  man's  harvest,  and  ridiculed  the 
embargo's  supposed  efficacy  in  bringing  England  to  terms.^° 

December  22,  1808,  the  anniversary  of  the  passage  of  the 
embargo  act,  was  observed  as  a  day  of  mourning  in  many 
of  the  New  England  towns  by  the  Federalists.  At  Salem 
the  sailors  met  at  sunrise  at  the  old  historic  North  Bridge  and 
fired  minute  guns  for  a  half  hour.  At  Beverly  the  vessels 
in  the  harbor  displayed  their  flags  at  half  mast;  the  crews 
marched  the  street  to  dismal  music.  The  flag  on  the  great 
bridge  at  Providence  hung  at  half-mast  throughout  the  day; 
the  ships  in  Boston  Harbor  were  '^ shrouded  in  mourning."-^ 
Portland  solemnized  the  anniversary  of  the  embargo  as  a  day 
of  mourning.  The  bells  were  tolled,  vessels  suspended  their 
colors  at  half  mast,  "a  solemn  procession  of  suffering  people 
with  badges  of  mourning"  carried  a  dismantled  ship.^^ 

At  Newburyport.  Massachusetts,  bells  tolled  at  sunrise,  flags 
hung  at  half  mast,  and  minute  guns  were  fired.  The  tolling 
of  bells  and  the  discharge  of  cannon  were  repeated  at  twelve 
and  four  o'clock.  A  procession  of  sailors  with  crape  on  the 
left  arm,  marshalled  by  an  officer,  marched  with  muffled  drum 
through  the  principal  streets  of  the  city.  A  dismantled 
ship  came  next  in  the  procession.  A  bell  tolled  on  the  vessel, 
and  inverted  cans,  signifying  a  lack  of  grog,  capped  her 
masts.  "Death  to  Commerce"  appeared  on  a  flag.  "0  grab 
me"  was  painted  on  the  bows  of  the  vessel.  An  old  sailor 
stood  on  the  quarter  deck,  inquiring  in  the  words  on  her  stern, 
''Which  way  shall  I  steer?"  Just  across  from  the  custom 
house  was  a  flag  representing  a  terrapin  with  his  head  in 
''most  dignified  retirement."  When  the  procession  reached 
the  custom  house,  it  halted,  and  a  sailor  standing  in  the  main 
chains  delivered  a  carefully  prepared  address.  A  large  croM'd 
of  spectators  heartily  applauded.  The  sailors  concluded  their 
ceremony  Avith  a  clam  dinner.^^ 


20  La   Lanterne   Magique,    November    20,    1808. 

21  McMaster,   J.   B.,   History   o/  the   People   of  the    United  States,  Vol.   Ill,   p.   323; 
and   Boston    Gazette,    December   22,    1808. 

22  New   England  Palladium,   January   10,   1809. 

23  Boston   Reperetory,    December    27,    1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  137 

The  following  item,  surrounded  in  heavy  black,  appeared 
in  a  Boston  paper: 

This  day  completes  one  whole  year  since  the  passing  of  Mr.  Jefferson's 
first  Embargo  Law.  It  is  an  epoch,  wliich  we  are  bold  in  asserting,  has 
no  parallel  in  political  or  commercial  history ;  and  in  the  contemplation  of 
its  extraordinary  features  and  effects,  brings  to  remembrance  a  retrospect 
of  privations,  at  once  painful  and  humiliating.  As  we  are  doomed  to 
this  species  of  political  castigation  by  the  authority  of  Law,  it  is  perhaps 
a  praiseworthy  action  of  moral  patriotism  to  suffer  patiently;  but  how 
far  the  stoicism  of  those,  who  feel  its  inefficacy  and  inexpediency — whose 
fortunes  have  been  abridged  and  their  accustomed  avocations  completely 
annihilated  by  the  "strong"  and  "coercive"  measure,  will  endure  is  a 
question  of  no  ordinary  magnitude  and  importance.  At  present,  they  rest 
in  silence,  leaning  on  the  anchor  of  Hope  and  appear  by  the  annexed 
comments,  to  offer  on  this  inauspicious  day,  no  other  show  of  resistance, 
than  what  is  exhibited  in  the  usual  emblems  of  mourning.-^* 

The  Washington  Federalist  of  December  22  gave  voice  to  a 
more  inflammatory   editorial: 

This  is  the  Birthday  of  the  Embargo.  This  illshapen  brat  of  backstairs 
intrigue  has  now  lived  a  year.  The  first  thing  of  the  kind  that  ever 
arrived  at  such  an  age.  And  Mr.  Jefferson  is  the  only  potentate  that 
ever  lived,  who  had  either  power  or  will  to  keep  such  a  monster  alive  for 
such  a  length  of  time.  It  surprises  and  astonishes  the  present  race  of 
mankind,  and  will  be  described  by  generations  to  come  with  wonder  and 
amazement.  The  future  historian  will  search  for  the  reason  for  the 
birth,  life  and  adventures  of  this  all  devouring  animal;  but  for  the  honor 
of  human  nature  we  hope  he  wiU  search  in  vain.  How  much  longer  we 
are  to  pant  under  the  pestiferous  breath  of  this  poisonous  dragon  is  not 
for  us  to  determine.  This  much  we  can  predict,  however,  without  the 
spirit  of  prophecy,  that  if  the  fathers  of  the  monster,  do  not  soon  stifle 
it,  a  Hercules  will  arise  in  the  north  who  will  put  it  to  rest.^s 

Even  before  the  Enforcement  Act  was  passed  in  accordance 
with  Gallatin's  wishes,  a  Boston  x^aper  made  a  strong  attack 
on  the  anticipated  measure : 

If  the  people  of  New  England  will  bear  the  measures  now  proposed 
by  Mr.  Gallatin 's  report  for  enforcing  the  Embargo  they  are  already 
slaves  and  nothing  is  to  be  hoped  for.  Mr.  Giles  has  already  brought  in 
a  Bill  in  conformity  to  this  report,  by  aid  of  which  the  Embargo  Laws 
are  to  be  enforced  with  a  tyranny  equal  to  Bonaparte's.  And  what  is 
most  alarming  of  all,  is  this,  that  the  authority  of  the  state  governments 
is  to  be  crushed  and  the  ofticers  of  the  general  government  may  plunder 


:;4  Boston    Gazette,    December    22,    1808. 

25   United   States   Gazette,   December   29,    1808. 


138      rOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

and  murder  and   will   still  be  protected  by  the  strong   arm  of   a  Jacobin 
administration. 

How  is  Massachusetts,  the  cradle  of  American  liberty  fallen?  Her 
rights  are  destroyed — her  citizens  enslaved.26 

A  New  York  paper,  on  January  4,  1809,  declared  that  the 
enforcing  act  exhibited  despotism  "without  even  a  cobweb  to 
cover  its  nakedness."^'' 

After  the  passage  of  the  Enforcement  Act,  January  9, 
1809,  newspapers,  protests,  and  town  meetings  became  very 
inflammatory.  Three  weeks  later  the  editor  of  a  New  York 
paper  wrote: 

We  this  day  place  upon  our  Journal,  that  monstrous  engine  of  oppres.sion, 
projected  by  Albert  Gallatin — framed  by  the  Virginia  Giles — and  put  into 
operation  by  the  servile  majority  in  Congress.  Bad  as  this  law  is,  it  has 
at  least  one  good  effect.  It  has  served  to  convince  everybody  of  the  de- 
signs of  the  administration,  and  to  arouse  the  patriotism  of  the  nation. 

As  the  most  trifling  infraction  of  this  law  will  be  punished  in  a  terrible 
manner,  we  beg  leave  to  advise  our  readers  to  read  it  with  attention,  and 
scrupulously  obey  its  injunctions.28 

The  same  paper  then  referred  to  the  talk  of  rebellion: 

Insurrection !  — Rebellion !  — Treason ! 

These  three  words  furnish  the  subject  matter  of  nine-tenths  of  the  con- 
tents of  all  of  our  jacobin  papers.  The  slaves  who  conduct  these  papers 
are  advised  to  "Tceep  their  temper."  Their  trick  will  no  longer  gull  the 
people — and  their  vaporing  is  lost  on  the  patriots  of  the  country.  The 
heroes  of  the  revolution  were  called  rebels,  insurgents,  and  traitors,  Vjy 
just  such  slaves  in  '74,  5  &  6.  In  those  stormy  days,  they  opposed  the 
tyrannical  decrees  of  George  the  Third.  They  now  feel  impelled  by  their 
duty  to  oppose  the  no  less  tyrannical  decrees  of  a  man,  who,  under  the 
garb  of  republicanism,  assumes  more  power  than  any  monarch  on  earth, 
Bonaparte  excepted.  If  they  are  again  called  rebels,  insurgents,  and 
traitors,  they  will  regard  it  as  little  as  they  did  then.  They  will  always 
be  found  equally  faithful  and  steadfast  in  their  principles,  and  equally 
indifferent  to  the  threats  and  menaces  of  despots  and  their  tools.29 

The  Boston  Reperetory  again  declared  that  the  enforcement 
act  would  soon  be  set  at  defiance,  if  not  repealed,  and  that 
it  behooved  the  people  of  Massachusetts  "to  speak,  for  strike 


26  Boston   Gazette,   December  25,   1808. 

27  The  Balance  and  New  York  State  Journal,  January  4,   1809. 

28  Ibid.,   January   28,    1809. 

29  Ibid.,   January   28,    1809. 


THE  AIMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  139 

they  must  if  speaking  did  not  answer.  "^^  A  handbill  circu- 
lated at  Newburyport  contained  the  following: 

You  have  reposed  confidence  in  a  coward  [Jefferson].  Nerve  your  arms 
with  vengeance  against  the  despot  who  would  wrest  the  inestimable  germ 
of  your  independence  from  you,  and  you  shall  be  conquerors.  Give  ear 
no  longer  to  the  siren  voice  of  democracy  and  Joffersonian  liberty.  It  is 
a  cursed  delusion,  adopted  by  traitors,  and  recommended  by  sycophants. ^i 

Resolutions  from  Bath,  Gloucester,  Augusta,  Belfast,  Castine, 
Alfred,  Portland,  Wells,  Hallowell,  Beverly,  Salem,  Newbury- 
port, Gloucester,  Boston,  Cambridge,  Hadley,  Brewster,  San- 
ford,  Northampton,  North  Yarmouth,  Amesbury,  Oxford,  New 
Bedford,  Provincetown,  Plymouth,  jNIarblehead,  Duxbury, 
Somerset,  Taunton,  Lynn,  Bolton,  Sterling,  and  from  dozens 
of  other  places  came  pouring  in  on  Jefferson  and  Congress 
in  condemnation  of  the  hostile  attitude  towards  Great  Britain 
and  "cringing  sycophancy"  towards  France.^^ 

Even  before  the  passage  of  the  Enforcement  Act  of  Janu- 
ary 9,  1809,  a  town  meeting  in  Bath,  M<aine,  on  December  27, 

1808,  as  reported  in  the  New  England  Palladium  of  Januarj^  3, 

1809,  adopted  resolutions  calling  on  the  general  court  at  its 
meeting  of  January  25,  to  take  immediate  steps  to  relieve 
the  people  "either  by  themselves  alone,  or  in  concert  with 
other  commercial  states."  At  the  same  time,  the  Bath  meet- 
ing voted  "that  a  committee  of  safety  and  correspondence  be 
appointed  to  correspond  with  committees  of  other  towns  .  .  . 
and  watch  over  the  safety  of  the  people  of  this  town,  and  to 
give  immediate  alarm  so  that  a  regular  meeting  may  be  called 
whenever  any  infringement  of  their  rights  shall  be  committed 
by  any  person  or  persons  under  color  and  pretence  of  authority 
derived  from  any  officer  of  the  United  States.  "'^•^  On  January 
12,  Gloucester  formally  approved  the  Bath  Resolutions,  voted 
an  address  to  the  general  court,  and  appointed  a  committee  of 
public   safety.^*     Other   towns,   however,   in   general,    dropped 


30  See   the   collection   of  clippings   in   Randall,    H.    S.   The   Life   of  Thomas  Jefferson, 
Vol.    Ill,    p.    283. 

31  Randall,   H.   S.,   Life   of  Thomas  Jefferson,   Vol.   Ill,   p.   283. 

32  McMaster,   J.   B.,   History  of  the  People   of  the   United  States,   Vol.   Ill,   pp.   327, 
328. 

33  Adams,  Henry.   History  of  the   United  Stales,  Vol.  IV,   pp.  409,   410. 

34  Ibid.,    p.    410. 


140      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

the  committees  of  public  saefty,  but  the  town  meetings  con- 
tinued. As  reported  in  the  New  England  Palladium  of  Febru- 
ary 3,  1807,  the  town  of  Wells  in  the  district  of  Maine  voted, 
on  January  23 :  "  That  we  deprecate  that  cringing  sycophancy 
which  has  marked  the  conduct  of  our  national  government 
toward  the  tyrant  of  Europe,  while  we  view  with  indignation 
and  alarm  its  hostility  toward  Great  Britain.  "^^  The  New 
England  Palladium  of  February  17,  1809,  presented  the  peti- 
tion of  Alfred,  a  small  town  of  Maine.  This  petition  charged 
the  national  government  with  an  attempt  "to  provoke  a  ruin- 
ous and  destructive  war  with  England,  to  gratify  the  ambition 
and  caprice,  and  augment  the  power  of  the  tyrant  of 
France. '  '^^ 

Two  protests  against  the  embargo,  and  particularly  against 
the  Enforcement  Act  "will  be  considered  in  some  detail  here — 
one  from  the  third  ward  of  New  York  City  and  the  other 
from  a  Boston  town  meeting.  On  February  6,  1809,  Mr. 
Mumford  of  'New  York  presented  to  the  House  a  memorial 
from  New  York  City  addressed  to  Congress.^^  This  remon- 
strance pointed  out  the  evils  under  the  enforcement  act,  the 
delays,  vexations,  and  oppressions,  upon  practically  every  class 
of  the  community. 

Upou  the  small  trader  and  boatman,  when  unable  to  find  security  [read 
the  memorial,]  the  act  operates  as  a  total  prohibition  of  the  use  of  his 
property.  It  increases  the  expenses  and  risks  of  those  engaged  in  trans- 
portation; it  thus  diminishes  competition  and  supplies;  and,  without 
benefitting  the  farmer,  enhances  the  prices  of  fuel  and  provisions  in  the 
cities,  at  a  time,  in  other  respects,  suflSciently  calamitous. 3s 

Objections  were  urged  to  the  number  and  amount  of  bonds, 
spies  and  informers,  extra  officers,  and  arbitrary  power.  "AVe 
presume,"  so  read  the  memorial,  "New  York  is  the  only  city 
on  earth,  where  according  to  a  public  and  formal  law,  the 
people  may  be  starved  at  the  mere  will  of  a  single  individ- 
ual. '  '^^    The  protest  declared : 


\ 


35  Ihid.,   p.    414. 

36  Ibid.,  pp.  415,  416.      See  also  Boston   Columbia  Centinel,  February  22,   1809. 

37  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.   19,   pp.    1777-1780. 

38  Ibid.,    pp.    1778,    1779. 

39  Ibid.,   p.   1779. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  141 

To  hardships,  deprivations,  and  oppressions,  such  as  this  act  may  im- 
pose, it  scarcely  can  be  expected  that  the  freemen  of  this  country  will 
submit. 

They  can  never  submit  to  military  government. 

They  can  never  surrender  the  trial  by  jury. 

They  can  never  consent  to  hold  their  property  subject  to  the  arbitrary 
control  of  any  man. 

They  can  never  surrender  those  other  essential  rights  of  freemen  which 
are  guaranteed  by  the  State  and  General  Constitutions,  which  their  fathers 
fought  to  maintain  and  which.,  when  the  occasion  calls  for  it,  they  will 
also  know  how  to  defend.^o 

Because  of  its  inttuence  on  other,  places  the  Boston  town 
meeting  of  January  23  and  24,  1809,  will  be  considered  in 
some  detail.  This  meeting  was  called  in  Faneuil  Hall  on 
January  23,  but  on  the  first  day,  after  a  moderator  had  been 
chosen,  resolutions  had  been  considered,  and  a  committee  had 
been  appointed,  adjournment  was  made  until  ten  o'clock  the 
next  morning.  On  that  daj'^  resolutions  were  read  and  ac- 
cepted by  a  large  majority.  They  were  addressed  to  the  Senate 
and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  Massachusetts  legislature. 
They  asked  the  legislature  to  request  the  national  government 
to  remove  the  embargo  laws  which  were  "subjecting  the  coast- 
ing trade  to  embarrassments  w^hich  threaten  its  annihilation." 
After  reminding  the  legislature  that  all  powers  not  expressly 
delegated  to  the  general  government  were  reserved  to  the 
state,  the  memorial  continued: 

We  submit  to  the  consideration  of  the  Legislature,  whether  this  most 
important  maxim  has  not  been  violated,  by  the  passing  of  an  Act,  in  the 
first  instance  permanently  prohibiting  foreign  commerce,  and  thus  sub- 
jecting this  all  important  object  of  the  National  Government,  to  the  pleasure 
of  the  Executive  and  one-third  part  of  the  Senate.  So  extravagant  an 
Exercise  of  Power  was  calculated  to  excite  jealousy  and  alarm,  and  to 
rouse  a  spirit  of  opposition  among  the  people  of  thousands  of  whom  it 
may  be  affirmed  that  their  house  is  on  the  Ocean,  and  with  respect  to  all 
of  whom,  it  is  certain,  that  their  prosperity,  by  the  unchangea])le  circum- 
stances of  local  situation,  immemorial  habits,  and  the  established  relations 
of  society,  is  absolutely  dependent  on  Commerce. 

Your  Memorialists  were  not,  however,  swift  to  condemn, — nor  rash  to 
violate  the  provisions  of  the  first  act ;  they  were  on  the  contrary  disposed 
to  acquiesce  in  a  measure  which,  though  beyond  their  comprehension,  might 
have  originated  in  circumstances  not  disclosed  to  them.  They  trusted  to 
the  assurances  of  the  Executive  Message  that  it  was  merely  a  measure  of 


40  Ibid.,   pp.    1779-1789. 


142      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

prccautioi: ;  and  to  the  impeiious  necessities  of  the  Nation,  that  its  duration 
would  be  short.  But  as  the  projectors  of  their  experiment  advanced  to 
the  maturity  of  their  system,  the  mask  was  gradually  lifted;  and  while 
official  communications  at  home  and  abroad,  insisted  upon  the  merely 
pacific,  and  preservative  character  of  the  Embargo  Laws,  it  was  disclosed 
from  other  sources,  that  their  true  features  were  those  of  hostility  and 
coercion;  and  the  Administration,  and  their  friends  no  longer  conceal  that 
the  Embargo  is  "War  in  disguise,"  and  is  soon  to  be  followed  by  open 

In  the  next  place,  the  memorial  condemned  the  pride  and 
poor  judgment  that  thought  our  commerce  was  necessary  to 
foreign  nations.  It  contended  that  the  measure  was  perhaps 
not  "unacceptg,ble"  to  Great  Britain,  for  it  had  taught  her 
colonies  that  they  were  independent  of  the  United  States  and 
had  stimulated  them  to  successful  competition  with  the  new 
republic.  The  abandonment  of  the  ocean,  the  remonstrance 
urged,  was  a  substantial  compliance  with  the  demands  of 
France  and  hence  had  received  the  approbation  of  Napoleon. 
As  a  measure  of  coercion  the  embargo  was  declared  impotent 
against  Great  Britain  and  France,  but  fraught  ''with  abso- 
lute destruction"  towards  the  United  States.  The  supple- 
mental act  just  passed  was  declared  "repugnant  to  the  Con- 
stitution and  to  the  first  principles  of  free  government." 

Under  colour  of  this  Law,  [read  the  memorial],  a  citizen  is  subjected 
to  penalties  and  forfeitures,  though  not  privy  to  any  breach  of  its  pro- 
visions. He  may  be  charged  with  and  convicted  of  crimes  and  offences, 
though  innocent  of  intentions  to  commit  them.  He  is  subject  to  un- 
reasonable searches  and  seizures  of  property,  upon  mere  suspicion  of  an 
intention  to  violate  the  Law,  and  the  discretion  of  an  interested  officer 
is  the  standaid  by  which  the  reasonableness  of  the  suspicion  must  be 
tested.  His  Vessels,  his  Warehouse,  the  most  secret,  and  sacred  deposit- 
ories of  his  property  and  effects,  not  excepting  his  Habitation,  are  liable 
to  be  ransacked,  upon  mere  suspicion,  by  a  military  force  under  general 
instructions  from  the  President  of  the  United  States;  and  when  by  the 
act  of  God,  he  is  prevented  from  complying  with  the  requisitions  of  the 
statute,  he  is  deprived  of  the  benefit  of  his  tryal  by  Jury  (unless  he  can 
furnish  a  species  of  evidence,  which  will  be  in  most  cases  impossible)  and 
must  rely  for  mercy  upon  the  mere  will  and  pleasure  of  an  individual 
dependent  on  Executive  favour.42 


41  A   Volume  of  Records  Relating  to  the  Early  History  of  Boston  Containing  Boston 
Tovm   Records,    1796   to   1813,   pp.   240,    241. 

42  Ibid.,   p.   242. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  143 

The  memorial  then  affirmed  that  war  was  the  intention  of 
the  government  and  raised  the  question  as  to  which  nation 
would  be  fought.  Though  possibly  commenced  against  both, 
the  remonstrance  stated,  war  would  soon  be  continued  against 
one  only,  Great  Britain,  and  probably  in  alliance  with  the 
other,  France.  In  such  a  case,  the  memorialists  declared, 
every  success  should  "be  deplored  as  a  defeat,"  and  "ultimate 
success  would  be  certain  ruin."  The  memorial  asked  the  legis- 
lature to  take  any  steps  it  saw  fit  to  obtain  the  repeal  of  the 
embargo  and  prevent  war;  it  pledged,  moreover,  its  support 
in  advance,  of  any  measures  the  legislature  might  see  fit  to 
adopt.*^ 

Captain  Daniel  Sargent  then  arose  and  offered  additional 
resolutions  which  were  passed  without  debate.  The  embargo 
was  declared  in  "many  respects  repugnant  to  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States,  the  State  Constitution,  and  to  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  all  free  Governments."  The  basis  for  this 
opinion  was  set  forth  in  detail  and  the  resolutions  followed: 

Therefore,  Resolved,  That  we  will  not  voluntarily  aid  or  assist  in  the 
execution  of  the  Act  passed  on  the  ninth  day  of  this  month,  for  enforcing 
the  several  Embargo  Laws;  and  all  those  who  shall  assist  in  enforcing  on 
others  the  arbitrary  and  unconstitutional  provisions  of  this  act,  ought  to 
be  considered  as  enemies  to  the  constitution  of  the  United  States  and  of 
this  state,  and  hostile  to  the  Liberties  of  this  people. 

Resolved,  That  the  raising  of  a  large  standing  Army  in  a  time  of  pro- 
found peace  with  the  name  and  title  of  "Volunteers"  for  the  purpose 
of  enforcing  Arbitrary  and  unconstitutional  Laws,  and  the  attempt  to 
place  the  Military  above  the  civil  authority — though  it  cannot  overaw  or 
dismay  this  great  and  poiverful  People — yet  must  be  considered  as  danger- 
ous to  Liberty  and  ought  to  call  forth  the  most  pointed  disapprobation 
of  all  its  friends. 

Resolved,  That  the  example  given  by  that  veteran  Soldier  Gen.  Lincoln 
&  other  undeviating  Patriots,  in  resigning  Offices  intended  to  be  prostituted 
to  subserve  the  purposes  of  oppressing  the  citizens  and  enforcing  arbitrary 
edicts,  ought  to  be  imitated  by  all  Public  officers,  and  that  the  Inhabitants 
of  this  Town  consider  it  an  highly  honourable  sacrifice  of  individual  emolu- 
ment to  Public  welfare.  Voted  that  these  Resolutions  be  adopted  by  the 
Town  and  printed  in  the  public  Papers.** 

The  clamor  coming  from  embargo  opponents  should  not,  how- 


43  Ihid.,   pp.   243,    244. 

44  Ibid.,  pp.  244,  245.     General  Benjamin  Lincoln  is  the  one  meant.    He  was  collector 
of  the  port  of  Boston  and  not  lieutenant-governor. 


144      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

ever,  blind  us  to  the  fact  that  even  after  the  passage  of  the 
odious  enforcement  act  of  January  9,  1809,  friends  of  the 
administration  held  meetings  in  its  support.  Only  four  of 
these  will  be  noted,  but  all  four  were  important.  Five  or 
six  thousand  Republicans  met  in  the  park  at  New  York  City 
and  voted  confidence  and  support  in  the  administration.*^  A 
Philadelphia  to^^■n  meeting  of  January  24,  passed  resolutions  in 
support  of  the  embargo.    One  of  these  read : 

Resolved,  That  the  embargo  is  a  measure  of  prudence,  policy,  and 
patriotism — has  our  entire  approbation,  and  that,  in  our  opinion,  had  it 
been  rigidly  observed,  it  would  have  produced  all  the  good  hoped  for  by 
its  friends,  and  have  prevented  the  necessity  of  a  recurrence  to  any  other 
means  to  ensure  justice  from  the  belligerent  nations.46 

Baltimore  citizens  to  the  number  of  five  thousand  passed 
resolutions  approving  the  embargo  and  the  administration.  In 
addition  they  gave  an  interesting  comment  on  the  condition 
of  the  country  by  adopting  resolutions  in  condemnation  of 
measures  unauthorized  by  the  Constitution  and  pledging  them- 
selves to  ''resist  to  extremity,  any  attempts  to  dissolve  the 
union  of  these  states,  the  basis  of  our  unrivaled  prosperity."*'^ 

On  February  20,  1809,  the  Republicans  of  Pittsburgh  up- 
held the  administration,  condemned  Pickering,  Gardenier,  and 
Quincy  by  name  and  others  by  implication  as  meriting  ''warm- 
est indignation"  for  encouraging  belligerents  to  violate  our 
rights.     One  resolution  read: 

Eesolved,  That  the  embargo  was  the  wisest  measure  which  under  existing 
restrictions  of  the  rights  of  neutrals  by  G.  Britain  and  France,  could  be 
opposed  to  the  unjust  edicts  of  those  nations;  and  that  so  far  its  con- 
sequences have  been  highly  beneficial,  inasmuch  as  it  has  preserved  an 
immense  capital  belonging  to  our  merchants  from  the  grasp  of  the  robbers 
of  the  ocean,  and  given  time  for  offensive  and  defensive  operations ;  and 
convinced  the  tyrants  of  the  sea  and  land,  that  the  American  people  will 
suffer  every  privation  rather  than  submit  to  the  tyranny  and  injustice  of 
any  power  on  the  globe.^s 

Naturally,  the  state  legislatures  were  at  times  forced  to  take 


45  National   Intelligencer,    February    1,    1809. 

46  Ibid.,  Januai-y  30,   1809. 

47  Ibid.,   Tebruary   1,    1809. 

48  Ibid.,   April   12,    1809. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  145 

action  either  for  or  against  the  embargo.  On  November  15, 
1808,  a  committee  of  the  Massachusetts  legislature  asked  for 
the  repeal  of  the  embargo  laws;  the  legislature  approved  the 
petition  and  a  copy  was  sent  to  Congress.*" 

Levi  Lincoln,  lieutenant  governor  of  I\Eassuchusetts  and  act- 
ing governor  since  Sullivan's  death  delivered  a  speech  to  the 
legislature  on  January  2,  1809,  in  support  of  the  national 
administration  and  derogatory  of  excitable  town  meetings.^" 
He  denied  the  prevalent  reports  that  the  administration  and 
southern  people  were  unfriendly  to  commerce,  though  he  dis- 
claimed any  intention  of  questioning  the  motives  of  others. 
He  praised  the  talents,  zeal,  and  work  of  the  party  in  power, 
but  declared:  "Misrepresentations,  groundless  suspicions,  vio- 
lent and  indiscriminate  abuse,  unless  checked,  must  end  in 
opposition  to  the  law,  contempt  for  its  authority  and  distracted 
breaches  of  the  public  peace. "'^  The  Senate,  on  February  3, 
passed  resolutions  objecting  to  Lincoln's  message.'^- 

On  February  1,  Lincoln  issued  a  proclamation  in  pursuance 
of  the  act  of  January  9,  1809,  calling  upon  certain  officers  and 
the  militia  to  execute  more  effectually  the  embargo  law.-^^  A 
committee  of  the  House  reported  unfavorably  on  this  procla- 
mation, and  the  report  was  accepted  by  a  vote  of  173  to  104.^'* 
The  report  was: 

Wherefore  resolved — That  in  the  opinion  of  this  house,  the  said  military 
orders  of  the  1st  of  February  instant  issued  by  his  honour  Levi  Lincoln, 
lieutenant  governor  and  commander  in  chief  of  the  commonwealth,  are 
irregular,  illegal  and  inconsistent  with  the  principles  of  the  constitution; 
tending  to  the  destruction  of  military  discipline,  an  infringement  of  the 
rights,  and  derogatory  to  the  honour  of  both  oflBcers  and  soldiers ;  sub- 
versive of  the  militia  system,  and  highly  dangerous  to  the  liberties  of  the 
people.55 

A  memorial  and  remonstrance  of  the  Massachusetts  legisla- 
ture was  prepared  and  sent  to  Congress.     It  pointed  out  the 


49  Annals    of    Congress,    Vol.    19,    pp.    128,    129. 

50  American   Register,   Vol.    V,    pp.    183-191. 

51  Ibid.,    p.    187. 

52  Ibid.,   pp.    191-196. 

53  Ibid.,    pp.    196,    197. 

54  Ibid.,    pp.    197-202. 

55  Ibid.,    p.    201. 


146      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

dangerous  powers  exercised  through  the  embargo,  showed  the 
harmful  effects  exercised  on  commerce,  declared  that  farmers 
and  sailors  could  not  by  an  act  of  government  be  converted 
into  manufacturers,  urged  that  merchants  and  mechanics  would 
never  consent  to  retire  from  the  seashore  to  the  interior  of 
the  country,  and  insisted  that  the  history  of  the  world  showed 
that  even  the  most  despotic  of  governments  hardly  ever  suc- 
ceeded in  changing  the  habits  of  a  people.  The  remonstrance 
then  condemned  the  changing  instructions  given  by  the  presi- 
dent for  former  standing  laws,  the  "indefinite  and  almost  un- 
limited authority"  given  to  customs  officers,  and  the  excessive 
sureties,  fines  and  penalties  imposed.  It  referred  to  the  past 
patriotism  of  Massachusetts,  repelled  charges  against  her  loy- 
alty, and  insisted  that  France  was  the  principal  aggressor,  while 
Great  Britain  had  shown  a  tendency  to  cultivate  a  friendly 
understanding.  ^^ 

On  February  4,  1809,  Governor  Trumbull  of  Connecticut 
had  answered  the  Secretary  of  War 's  letter  concerning  embargo 
enforcement  in  part  as  follows: 

I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  18th  January,  conveying  to  me  a 
request  of  the  president  of  the  United  States,  that  as  commander  in 
chief  of  the  militia  of  the  state,  I  would  appoint  a  select  number  of 
officers  of  our  militia,  to  whom  the  collectors  of  the  customs  may  apply 
for  military  aid  in  certain  cases,  which  may  hy  them,  be  thought  necessary 
for  compelling  obedience  to  the  laws  of  Congress  enforcing  the  embargo.*  *  * 

I  have  reflected  that  neither  the  constitution  nor  statutes  of  tliis  state, 
have  given  to  the  commander  in  chief  of  its  militia,  any  authority  to 
make  such  appointment  of  officers  as  has  been  requested;  nor  does  my 
information  suggest  to  me,  any  authority  given  to  the  president  of  the 
United  States  derived  either  from  the  constitution  or  laws  of  the  United 
States,  to  call  upon  the  executive  of  an  individual  state  to  take  an  agency 
in  appointments,  such  as  are  contemplated  by  the  request  mentioned. 

Conceiving  also  as  I  do,  and  believing  it  to  be  the  opinion  of  the  great 
mass  of  the  citizens  of  this  state,  that  the  late  law  of  Congress  for  the 
more  rigorous  enforcement  of  the  embargo  is  unconstitutional  in  many  of 
its  provisions,  interfering  with  the  state  sovereignties,  and  subversive  ofi 
the  guaranteed  rights,  privileges  and  immunities  of  the  citizens  of  the 
United  States;  I  have  from  these  considerations  deemed  it  peculiarly  and 
highly  improper  for  a  state  executive  to  contribute  his  volunteer  aid  in 
support  of  laws  bearing  such  an  aspect.s^ 

56  Ibid.,   pp.    202-208. 

57  Ibid.,   p.    178. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  147 

The  governor,  on  February  25,  asked  a  special  session  of  the 
legislature  to  consider  the  embargo  laws  by  committee.  He  re- 
ferred to  the  numerous  petitions  and  resolutions  drawn  up  by 
town  meetings,  the  apparent  permanency  of  the  embargo  laws, 
and  the  "many  very  extraordinary,  not  to  say  unconstitutional 
provisions"  for  the  execution  of  the  act  of  January  9.  He  point- 
ed out  the  dangerous  state  of  the  country  and  asked  the  legis- 
lature "to  devise  such  constitional  measures  as  in  their  wisdom" 
might  "be  judged  proper  to  avert  the  threatening  evil.^^  The 
legislature  reported  the  expected  resolutions  in  support  of  the 
state  government  and  in  condemnation  of  the  embargo  laws. 
The  following  extract  summarizes,  in  part,  the  attitude  of  the 
Connecticut  law  makers: 

After  solemn  deliberation  and  advisement  thereon,  the  general  assembly 
are  decided  in  the  opinion,  and  do  resolve,  that  the  acts  aforesaid  are  a 
permanent  system  of  measures,  abandoning  undeniable  rights ;  interdicting 
the  exercise  of  constitutional  privileges,  and  unprecedented  in  the  annals 
of  nations;  and  do  contain  provisions  for  exercising  arbitrary  powers,  griev- 
ous to  the  good  people  of  this  state,  dangerous  to  their  common  liberties, 
incompatible  with  the  constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  encroaching 
upon  the  immunities  of  this  state.s^ 

The  resolutions  of  the  Delaware  House  failed  of  adoption  be- 
cause the  Senate  refused  to  agree  without  modification.  These 
proposed  changes  the  House  refused  to  accept ;  hence  the  matter 
was  dropped.  Rhode  Island,  apparently  the  last  state  to  attack 
the  embargo,  passed  resolutions  against  it  in  both  houses  on 
March  4,  1809,  but  by  the  close  vote  of  7  to  4  in  the  upper 
house  and  35  to  28  in  the  lower.^° 

Outside  of  New  England,  Delaware,  and  New  York,  these 
resolutions  excited  little  sympathy.  In  fact,  a  resolution  of 
Massachusetts  proposing  to  amend  the  United  States  Constitu- 
tion so  that  no  embargo  could  suspend  commerce  for  more  than 
thirty  days  after  the  opening  of  the  season  of  Congress  succeed- 
ing the  one  passing  it  was  expressly  disapproved  by  nearly  all 
the   states  during   1809   and   1810,   including   North    Carolina, 


58  Ibid.,   p.    176. 

59  Ibid.,    p.    180. 

60  Ames,  H.  V.,  State  Documents  on  Federal  Relations.  This  is  a  University  of 
Pennsylvania  study  and  gives  excellent  source  material  on  embargo  relations,  pp. 
26-44. 


148      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

Maryland,   Georgia,   New  Jersey,   Delaware,   and   New   Hamp- 
shire.^^ 

North  Carolina  represented  the  typical  attitude  south  of  New 
York.  Even  before  the  strong  action  o:^  Connecticut  and  Massa- 
chusetts, the  Senate  of  North  Carolina,  November  29,  1808,  ap- 
proved the  measures  of  the  national  government,  though  appar- 
ently this  approval  was  not  formally  voiced  until  December  5. 
The  preamble  to  the  act  expressed  fear  that  the  "great  clamor" 
against  some  of  the  government  acts  might  cause  foreign  nations 
to  think  that  the  United  States  was  divided.  Three  of  the  seven 
resolutions,  the  fourth,  fifth,  and  sixth,  related  specifically  to 
the  embargo.    The  fourth  and  sixth  read : 

Eesolved,  That,  though  the  laws  laying  an  embargo  have  borne  hard 
upon  a  great  part  of  the  citizens  of  the  United  States,  the  Legislature  of 
North  Carolina  consider  them  as  the  best  means  which  could  have  been 
devised  to  preserve  our  citizens  and  projierty  from  the  devouring  grasp 
of  the  belligerent  powers.  *  *   * 

Resolved,  That  sooner  than  submit  to  unjust  and  vexatious  restrictions 
on  pur  commerce;  to  the  impressment  of  our  seamen;  and  to  the  taxation 
of  the  cargoes  of  our  vessels,  at  the  pleasure  of  foreign  nations,  we  wili 
live  to   ourselves,  and   have  no   connexion  with  any  of  them.62 

Even  in  New  England  there  was  some  support  for  Jefferson's 
administration.  Thus  the  New  Hampshire  House  voted:  "In 
reviewing  the  measures  of  the  national  administration,  we  remain 
satisfied  that  they  are  the  result  of  wise  deliberations.  The  em- 
bargo laws,  especially  we  consider  as  a  wise  expedient  which 
has  saved  the  country  an  immense  property;  and  thousands  of 
citizens."  The  Senate,  which,  by  the  way,  was  composed  of  nine 
Republican  and  three  Federal  members,  voted  stronger  approval : 
"We  cannot  but  think  that  the  finger  of  Heaven  pointed  out 
the  Embargo,  as  the  only  measure  Congress  could  devise^  which 
could  comport  with  the  safety,  honor  and  independence  of  our 
country. '  "^^ 

The  West  generally  supported  the  administration.  Thus  the 
General  Assembly  of  Kentucky  with  one  dissenting  vote  in  the 


Ci  Pennsylvania   Archives,   Fourth    Series,    Vol.   IV,   Papers   of   the   Governors,   1795- 

1817,   pp.    690-740. 

62  American    State    Papers,    Class    X,    Miscellaneous,    Vol.    I,    pp.    944,    945. 

6.',  National    Intelligencer,    December    12,    1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  149 

House  and  three  in  the  Senate  adopted  resolutions  of  support 
and  endorsement.^* 

The  Virginia  resolutions  of  February  7,  1809,  in  referring 
to  the  expediency  of  the  embargo  said : 

If  it  has  failed,  in  any  degree,  as  a  measure  of  constraint,  your  com- 
mittee believe  that  it  is  not  because  our  enemies  have  not  felt  its  force, 
but  because  they  believe  we  have  felt  it  too  sensibly;  because  the  unfortu- 
nate opposition  which  the  measure  has  met  in  some  parts  of  the  union, 
has  inspired  them  with  a  fallacious  hope  that  we  ourselves  either  could 
not  or  would  not  bear  its  privations.65 

Opposition  to  the  embargo  was  carried  to  the  extent  of 
threats  of  disunion.  On  March  10.  1808,  Christopher  Gore  wrote 
to  Rufus  King  that  a  frequently  discussed  question  was 
whether  the  states  east  of  the  Delaware  would  not  combine  in 
an  effort  to  prevent  war  with  Great  Britain.  Another  question 
considered,  he  said,  was  the  calling  of  a  convention  of  merch- 
ants to  deliberate  on  their  embarrassments  in  consequence  of 
the  embargo.^** 

For  some  time  John  Quincy  Adams  had  expressed  a  fear  that 
civil  war  might  result  from  the  embargo.^^  On  December  8,  he 
wrote  to  Orchard  Cook  that  a  continuance  of  the  embargo  might 
mean  a  civil  war,  which  was  more  dangerous  than  a  foreign 
war.®®  This  change  in  Adams'  feelings  was  very  pronounced, 
for  on  August  22,  he  had  written  Cook  that  the  embargo  though 
"beyond  all  question  a  distressing  calamity"  to  the  country, 
was,  in  comparison  with  war  either  with  England  or  France,  as 
"no  more  than  the  bite  of  a  flea  to  the  bite  of  a  rattlesnake."®^ 

On  December  15,  1808,  H.  G.  Otis  wrote  to  Josiah  Quincy, 
and  gave  an  early  reference  to  a  Hartford  convention : 

".  .  .What  then  shall  we  do?  In  other  words,  what  can  Connecticut  do? 
For  we  can  and  will  come  up  to  her  tone.  Is  she  ready  to  declare  the 
Embargo  and  its  supplementary  chains  unconstitutional, — to  propose  to 
their  State  the  appointment  of  delegates  to  meet  those  from  the  other 
commercial  States  in  convention  at  Hartford  or  elsewhere,  for  the  purpose 


64  Ibid.,    January    23,    1809. 

65  Ames,   H.  V.  State  Documents  en  Federal  Relations,  p.   431. 

66  Life   and    Correspondence    of   Rufus   King,   Vol.   V,    p.    88. 

67  See    his   letters    to    Orchard    Cook,    August    22,    1808,    to    William    Branch   Giles, 
November  15,  and  to  Ezekiel  Bacon,  November  17,  in  Writings,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  240-251. 

68  Ibid.,    pp.    260-262. 
60   Ibid.,    p.    240. 


150      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

of  providing  some  mode  of  relief  that  may  not  be  inconsistent  with  tJie 
iinion  of  these  States,  to  which  we  should  adhere  as  long  as  possible?  Shall 
New  York  be  invited  to  join?  and  what  shall  be  the  proposed  objects  of 
such  a  convention?  "70 

On  November  30,  Sir  George  Prevost  addressed  thirty-six 
questions  to  his  agent,  John  Howe.  The  seventeenth  referred 
to  the  political  situation  in  New  England.  The  agent  in  answer- 
ing it  declared  that  if  the  English  government  did  not  let  the 
United  States  out  of  their  own  trap,  "not  a  doubt"  could  "be 
entertained  but  that  a  separation  of  the  Eastern  States"  would 
ensue  unless  the  embargo  were  repealed.  If  the  English  answer 
did  not  suit,  Howe  held,  the  Republicans  would  try  to  provoke 
a  war  with  England  to  save  the  union.'^^ 

On  January  3,  1809,  President-elect  Madison,  a  calm  and 
trained  observer,  said  that  the  impatience  under  the  embargo, 
especially  in  Massachusetts,  was  becoming  "extremely  acute" 
under  the  artificial  excitements  given  to  it,  and  that  a  prefer- 
ence for  war  within  a  very  limited  period  was  "everywhere 
gaining  ground.'^" 

President  Dwight  of  Yale  College  about  the  same  time  preach- 
ed on  the  text  "Come  out  therefore  from  among  them,  and  be 
ye  separate,  saith  the  Lord.  "^^ 

Newspapers  had  long  been  commenting  on  the  danger  of 
separation.    A  Boston  paper  declared  on  April  1,  1808 : 

The  citizens  of  Massachusetts  are  now  called  upon,  not  to  endure  the 
evils  accidentally  resulting  from  a  system  of  conduct  suggested  by  a  watch- 
ful solicitude  for  the  general  prosperity,  but  to  approbate  a  course  of 
policy,  consistent  with  our  present  democratic  administration,  which  threat- 
ens the  republic  with  all  the  horrors  of  a  war,  wliich  has  already  diffused 
distress  over  the  whole  country  by  a  ruinous  Embargo,  and  which  seems  to 
meditate  a  total  annihilation  of  commerce.  If  we  rise  up,  to  a  man,  and 
express  our  detestation  of  these  measures,  we  may  escape  the  misery  that 
is  yet  in  reserve.  But  if  we  reelect  those  officers  who  have  thanked  Con-? 
gross  for  the  Embargo,  we  may  rest  assured,  the  Embargo  will  be  con- 
tinued, till  we  are  heartily  sick  of  it.     It  is  surely  a  strong  measure.     It 


70  Life    of   Josiah    Quincy    of   Mass.,    by    his    son    Edmund    Quincy,    p.    165. 

71  "Secret  Reports  of  John  Howe,"  American  Historical  Review,  Vol.  XVII,  p.  349. 

72  Writings   of   James   Madison,    Vol.   VIII,    p.    42. 

73  Morison,    S.    E.,    Harrison    Gray    Otis,    Vol.    II,    p.    8. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  151 

is  strong  as  death,  and  voracious  as  the  grave.     If  we  do  not  cure  the 
disease  in  its  early  stage,  it  may  require  a  desperate  remedyj* 

The  Republican  Crisis,  a  New  York  paper,  in  an  inflammatory 
article,  compared  conditions  in  Jefferson's  administration  with 
conditions  in  former  times.    It  said,  in  part : 

We  are  now  (shame  to  its  coward  authors!)  in  spirit  and  in  measure, 
sunk  below  contempt — Then,  the  nation  which  dared  insult  or  injure  us, 
'though  oceans  rolled  between,'  felt  our  remonstrance  and  rendered  justice. 
- — Now,  to  shun  the  'occasion,  we  are  compelled  by  our  wonderful  adminis- 
tration, to  abandon  the  ocean,  and  to  break  off  all  commerce  with  the  rest 
of  the  world ;  like  a  spiritless,  contemptible  spaniel  yelping  his  own  dis- 
grace as  he  seeks  for  safety  in  the  dignified  retirement  of  his  kennel. — ■ 
Genius  of  America!   Whither  art  thou  fled! 

Tell  me  not  that  the  Embargo,  and  the  Non-Intercourse  system  are  meas- 
ures of  wisdom  or  necessity — for  they  are  neither — ask  the  merchants, 
(whose  interests  are  most  affected,)  whether  they  thank  the  President  for 
saving  their  property  by  the  Embargo! — with  united  voice  they  will  ex- 
claim No — Ask  the  Farmers  of  this  fruitful  land,  if  they  will  fall  down 
and  worship  this  great  Idol,  the  Embargo,  for  their  share  of  untold  bless- 
ings!— with  imprecations  they  curse  the  measure,  or  point,  in  sullen  silence, 
to  the  wretchedness  and  woe  which  it  has  brought  upon  them.  Ask  the 
honest,  the  industrious  Mechanick  to  recount  the  mighty  comforts  which 
Mr.  Jefferson's  Embargo  has  scattered  in  his  path?  he  teUs  you,  he  is  out 
of  employ — his  wife  and  children  dearer  to  him  than  life,  are  pinched  with 
hunger  and  he,  wretched  man!  must  be  dragged  to  prison  the  next  hour!  !  I 
0,  blessed  Embargo!  "more  popular  than  any  other  measure  taken  by 
the  republican  administration,"  says  the  Natioival  Intelligencer,  the  Presi- 
dential Bagpipe  at  Washington — "Encore,"  cries  that  faithful  echo,  the 
Albany  Eegister,  "the  Embargo  is  proved  to  be  more  popular  than  any 
other  measure  taken  by  the  republican  administration ! ! !  " 

People  of  America!  how  long  will  ye  suffer  such  gross  indignities  to 
your  understanding!     Such  mad  violations  of  your  rights  and  interests !75 

A  writer,  using  the  pen  name  of  Phocion  published  a  strong 
article  in  Jackson's  Political  Register.  Two  short  paragraphs 
follow : 

From  Maine  to  Orleans,  the  merchant,  the  farmer,  the  mechanick  ancT 
the  labourer,  are  suffering  the  pressure  of  want  that  some  few  high  in 
office  may  preserve   the   favor   of   their   trans-atlantick  master.  .  . 

How  long,  Americans,  will  you  suffer  this?  How  long  shall  your  country 
be  debased  and  degraded  in  the  eyes  of  Europe — the  very  name  of  Am- 
erica be  a  term  of  reproach?     I  feel  that  you  will  not  endure  it  longer. 


74  Boston    Gazette,    April    1,    1808. 

75  Quoted    in    Boston    Reperetonj,    May    31,    1808. 


152      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

The  day  of  retribution  is  at  banc],  and  your  Ijetrayers  will  soon  find  to 
their  sorrow,  that  the  American  spirit  has  only  slumbered,  but  is  not  yet 
extinguished.  It  will  rise  with  renewed  vigor,  and  overwhelm  them  with 
shame  and  disgrace.''^ 

Administration  papers  freely  admitted  the  growing  opposi- 
tion to  the  embargo  and  the  threats  of  disunion.  One  of  these 
on  October  13,  published  a  department  known  as  "Bold  Lan- 
guage ' '  which  contained  extracts  taken  from  late  Federal  Papers. 
Several  follow: 

Every  man  will  presume  that  he  is  not  bound  to  regard  it  [the  embargo], 
but  may  send  his  produce  or  his  merchandise  to  a  foreign  market,  in  the 
same  manner  as  if  the  government  had  never  undertaJcen  to  prohibit  it — 
Boston  Centinel. 

We  know  that  if  the  Embargo  be  not  removed  our  citisens  will  ere  Ion;/ 
set  its  restrictions  and  its  penalties  at  defiance. — No  Republican  govern- 
ment can  constitutionally  ruin  its  citizens,  charged  with  no  crime.  This 
will  remove  scruples  of  conscience,  and  the  people  will  trade. — Boston 
Reperetory. 

It  behooves  us  to  speak,  for  Strike  we  Must,  if  speaking  does  not 
answer — Boston  Reperetory. 

There  are  thousands  every  day  denouncing  the  claims  made  upon  that 
nation  (the  English)  as  unjust  and  unreasonable,  and  openly  declaring  that 
it  is  our  true  policy  to  rescind  those  claims,  take  protection  under  the 
British  navy,  and  unite  with  her  against  the  the  Emperor  of  France — 
New  York  Herald. 

It  is  better  to  suffer  the  amputation  of  a  limb  than  to  lose  the  whole 
body.     We  must  prepare  for  the  operation. — Boston  Gazette.^^ 

Five  articles,  signed  "Falkland,"  discussed  "A  Separation 
of  the  states;  and  its  Consequences  to  New  England. "^^  A 
Richmond  paper,  a  supporter  of  the  administration,  accused 
the  Federalists  of  wanting  a  separation  of  the  union."  A  New- 
buryport  circular,  widely  copied  by  administration  papers,  con- 
cluded : 

The  day  of  political  probation  is  fast  verging  to  a  close;  when  the  fate 
of  America  will  be  decided,  and  the  laurels  bought  with  the  price  of  free- 
men's blood,  will  grace  the  brows  of  the  Gallic  tyrant.  Let  every  man 
who  holds  the  name  of  America  dear  to  him,  stretch  forth  his  hands  and 


"6  Quoted  in  Boston  Reperetory,  June  3,  1808.     See  also  Connecticut  Courant,  June 
29,    1808. 

77  Quoted    in    Newburyport   Statesman,    October    13,    1808. 

78  Boston   Columbian  Centinel,   September   10,   14,   17,   24  and   October   1,   1808. 

79  Richmond    Enquirer,    November    1,    1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  153 

put  this  accursed  thing,  this  Embargo  from  him.  Be  resolute,  act  like  sons 
of  liberty,  of  God,  <and  your  country:  nerve  your  arm  with  vengeance 
against  the  Despot  who  would  M-rest  the  inestimable  germ  of  your  inde- 
pendence from  you — and  you  shall  be  Conquerors! ! ! — And  all  the  People 
shall  say  Amen.so 

One  of  the  radical  Boston  papers  published  the  following 
item  in  January: 

Americans  ! 
Tour  dearest  TUfjhts  and  Liberties  are  in  jeopardy.    The  Decree  of  Slav- 
ery has  been  issued;  and  Fifty  Thousand  mercenaries  are  to  be  embodied 
to  execute  an  odious  Embargo  Latv  at  the  point  of  the  bayonet. 

Americans ! 
A  venal  faction — the  slaves  and  apologists  of  the  bloody  Tyrant  of 
Europe- — have  the  folly  to  attempt  riveting  on  you  the  galling  fetters  of 
Slavery.  Will  you  tamely  submit  to  this  yoke?  No!  Act  then  with  firm- 
ness and  moderation.  Leave  vaporing  and  bullying  to  your  adversaries. — 
Ascertain  your  Rights;  and  defend  them  as  becomes  men  who  know  their 
privileges,  and  will  never  shrink  from  their  duties. si 

An  editorial,  "Government!  Or  Rebellion"  in  an  administra- 
tion newspaper  declared  a  few  days  later : 

When  the  standard  of  rebellion  shall  be  unfurled  in  the  North,  and  a 
British  commissioner,  like  Lord  Hutchinson,  shall  bo  landed  on  our  shores, 
to  see  the  rebel  troops  in  the  field,  and  to  distribute  the  subsidy  of  cash, 
then  the  whole  mystery  of  federal  mercantile  opposition,  and  British  in- 
trigue, will  be  unravelled. 82 

A  Danville,  Vermont,  paper  a  few  days  later  declared: 
Seeds  of  Insurrection! 

Till  this  period  we  had  not  entertained  any  serious  fears  of  a  rebellion 
against  the  laws  of  our  country — but  we  are  constrained  now  to  state 
with  much  concern  that  the  prospects  of  such  an  event  are  truly  alarming. 
Several  of  the  eastern  federal  prints  have  published  the  late  act  for  en- 
forcing the  Embargo,  (which  will  appear  in  our  next)  with  their  papers 
dressed  in  mourning,  and  have  annexed  to  that  Law  the  funeral  obsequies 
of  Liberty  in  regular  procession ! !  Subjects  of  such  importance  and  sol- 
emnity are  not  to  be  trifled  with.  For  Heaven's  sake  let  us  pause,  and 
consider  the  calamities  of  civil  war.  .  .s^ 

In  support  of  this  view  the  editor  then  quoted  from  the  Boston 
Courier  and  the  Northampton  Anti-Monarchist,  the  former  de- 


80  Baltimore   Evening   Post,    December    1,    1808. 

81  Boston    Columbian    Centinel,    January    21,    1809. 

82  Northampton   Anti-Monarchist  and  Republican    Watchman,   January   25,    1809. 

83  North  Star,  January  28,   1809. 


154      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

daring:  ''There  appears  to  be  a  preconcerted  plan  among  the 
federalists  in  this  section  of  the  union,  to  effect  open  rebellion 
against  the  general  government.  .  . "  ;  and  the  latter  stating : 

There  is  a  prospect  that  New  England  will  become  a  theatre  of  hostile 
operations  against  the  government  of  the  United  States,  and  the  integrity 
of  the  Union.  .  . 

This  project,  foul,  abominable,  and  murderous  as  it  is,  is  now  agitated 
in  federal  caucuses.  It  has  become  the  topic  of  common  conversation 
with  leading  federal  men.s* 

A  month  later  a  Boston  paper  urged :  "Americans!  Arouse 
from  your  lethargy.  Act  like  men  for  your  country ;  and  swear 
that  that  country  shall  never  be  the  'Slave'  which  Washington 
declares  it  must  be,  if  men  with  inveterate  antipathies  against 
one  nation,  and  'passionate  attachments'  for  another,  are  per- 
mitted to  guide  your  councils."**  The  next  day  another  Bos- 
ton paper,  this  time  an  administration  paper,  made  the  following 
statement:  "A  handbill,  circulating  in  Connecticut,  recom- 
mends a  connection  between  the  New  England  States,  Canada 
and  Nova  Scotia,  for  the  protection  of  commerce !"^^ 

Possibly  one  of  the  most  insulting  and  threatening  of  the  town 
resolutions,  those  of  Gloucester,  appeared  in  a  Boston  paper 
of  February  24,  1809.    The  words,  in  part,  follow : 

"We  see  not  only  the  purse-strings  of  our  nation  in  the  hands  of  a 
Frenchified  Genevean,  but  all  our  naval  forces  and  all  our  militia  placed 
under  the  control  of  this  same  foreigner,  whom  we  cannot  but  think  a 
satellite  of  Bonaparte.  .  .  In  our  opinion  the  national  Cabinet  has  given  to 
this  country  and  the  world  the  most  indubitable  evidence  of  their  insin- 
cerity; that  their  great  study  has  been  to  involve  this  country  in  a  war 
with  Great  Britain,  and  of  course  to  form  a  coalition  with  France,  regard- 
less of  consequences.  Their  pledges  to  France  of  their  willingness  to  sul:)- 
mit  to  the  wishes  or  mandates  of  the  Corsican  have  been  satisfactory.  .  . 
We  should  deprecate  a  separation  of  the  States  and  would  resort  to  every 
honorable  means  of  redress  before  we  would  seek  relief  in  a  dissolution 
of  the  Union.  .  .Our  Administration  can  dissemble  their  real  motives  no 
longer;  our  dreadful  forebodings  prove  realities;  the  expected  blow  has 
reached  us,  and  by  it  has  fled  our  liberty.  "§6 

The  attitude  of  the  people,  of  course,  was  reflected  in  the 
speeches  of  their  representatives  in  Congress.     These  often  con- 


84  Boston    Colvmibian    Centinel,    February    22,    1809. 

85  Independent    Chronicle,    February    23,    1809. 

86  New   England  Palladium,  February   24,    1809. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  155 

tained,  as  previously  intimated,  scarcely  veiled  threats  of  dis- 
union. Debates  waged  bitter  on  the  enforcement  bill,  and  even 
more  so  after  its  passage.  Only  two  of  the  Senate  speeches  in 
favor  of  the  repeal  of  the  embargo  will  be  considered — one  de- 
livered by  J.  A.  Bayard  of  Delaware,  and  the  other  by  James 
Hillhouse  of  Connecticut. 

The  former,  in  the  course  of  a  lengthy  discourse,*^  delivered 
February  14,  1809,  on  the  partial  repeal  of  the  embargo,  review- 
ed the  orders  and  decrees  of  the  belligerent  nations,  and  re-stated 
the  familiar  objections  to  the  embargo  policy.  In  the  course  of 
his  address  he  declared : 

We  all  know  that  the  opposition  to  the  embargo  in  the  Eastern  states 
is  not  the  opposition  of  a  political  party,  or  of  a  few  discontented  men, 
but  the  resistance  of  the  people  to  a  measure  which  they  feel  as  oppressive 
and  regard  as  ruinous.  The  people  of  this  country  are  not  to  be  governed 
by  force,  but  by  affection  and  confidence.  It  is  for  them  we  legislate; 
and  if  they  do  not  like  our  laws,  it  is  our  duty  to  repeal  them.ss 

A  week  later,  February  21,  Senator  Hillhouse  of  Connecticut, 
in  discussing  non-intercourse,  referred  to  the  sufferings  of  the 
laborers  due  to  the  embargo.®^  He  held  that  in  spite  of  the  dis- 
inclination of  the  people  to  seek  relief  at  the  poor  house,  hun- 
dreds of  applications  for  admission  at  New  Haven  had  been 
turned  down,  when,  ordinarily,  the  poor  house  would  accom- 
modate three  times  the  number  of  people  in  it.  He  maintained 
that  such  sufferings  were  common  in  all  commercial  towns.  In 
Baltimore,  he  said,  examiners  found  conditions  ''truly  distres- 
sing to  the  feelings  of  humanity,  both  as  to  their  numbers  and 
their  necessities."  In  Philadelphia,  he  urged,  the  Marine  So- 
ciety found  "upward  of  one  thousand  objects  of  charity,  who, 
from  a  state  of  comfort,  have  been  reduced  to  the  lowest  abyss 
of  poverty." 

After  Hillhouse  had  concluded,  the  vote  was  taken  on  the 
bill  which  was  entitled,  "An  act  to  interdict  the  commercial 
intercourse  between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain  and 
France,  and  their  dependencies,  and  for  other  purposes."  The 
measure  was  passed  21  to  12.     The  negative  votes  were  cast 


87  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.  XIX,  pp.  388-409. 

88  Ibid.,  p.  403. 

89  Ibid.,    pp.    424-436. 


156      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

by  Bayard  and  White  of  Delaware,  Crawford  of  Georgia,  Oil- 
man and  Parker  of  New  Hampshire,  Goodrich  and  Hillhouse 
of  Connecticut,  Lloyd  and  Pickering  of  Massachusetts,  Eeed  of 
Maryland,  Sumter  of  South  Carolina,  and  Turner  of  North 
Carolina."^  The  majority  of  these  men,  it  should  be  noted,  were 
opponents  of  the  embargo  system. 

In  the  House,  on  January  16,  1809,  a  bill  for  the  relief  of 
sick,  disabled,  and  distressed  seamen  was  read  for  the  third 
time  and  passed  by  a  vote  of  66  to  30.  Some  speakers,  as 
Burwell  of  Virginia,  had  on  the  14,  opposed  the  measure  on 
the  score  that  seamen  were  no  more  entitled  to  relief  than 
other  sufferers  from  the  embargo.''^  In  the  Senate,  the  measure 
was  amended  and  its  consideration  indefinitely  postponed.  "^ 

On  January  19,  Nathaniel  Macon  of  North  Carolina  admitted 
the  bad  effect  of  the  embargo  on  the  South,  for  southerners 
did  not  want  produce  left  on  their  hands  to  rot.  He  insisted 
that  the  South  was  suffering  for  maritime  rights,  for  as  grow- 
ers it  was  immaterial  in  point  of  interest  into  what  ship  or 
wagon  their  produce  found  its  way.  We  are  contending,  he 
urged,  for  our  mercantile  brethren  of  the  North.^^ 

On  January  30,  the  House  took  up  in  earnest  the  debate  on 
the  following  resolution  submitted  by  W.  C.  Nicholas  of  Vir- 
ginia a  few  days  previously : 

Resolved,  As  the  opinion  of  this  House,  that  the  United  States  ought  not 

to  delay  beyond  the day  of to  repeal 

the  embargo  laws,  and  to  resume,  maintain,  and  defend,  the  navigation  of 
the  high  seas,  against  any  nation,  or  nations,  having  in  force  edicts,  orders, 
or  decrees  violating  the  lawful  commerce  and  neutral  rights  of  the  United 
States.94 

William  Milnor  of  Pennsylvania  made  a  motion  to  take  the 
question  first  on  repealing  the  embargo,  and  to  fill  the  blank 
with  "fourth  day  of  March",  but  John  Randolph  of  Roanoke 
wanted  an  immediate  repeal.  He  declared  that  the  embargo  was 
daily   and   hourly  disregarded,   that   sleighs   passed   from   the 

90  Ibid.,    p.    436. 

91  Ibid.,    pp.    1073-1077. 

92  Ibid.,    pp.    322-328. 

93  Ibid.,    p.    1103. 

94  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.  XIX,  p.   1230. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO.  1807-1809  157 

United  States  into  Canada  loaded  with  the  products  of  all  parts 
of  the  Union.^^ 

D.  R.  Williams  of  South  Carolina,  in  the  course  of  an  im- 
passioned speech  on  the  same  day,  said : 

The  excitement  in  the  East  render  it  necessary  that  we  should  enforce 
the  embargo  with  the  bayonet  or  repeal  it.  I  will  repeal  it — and  I  could 
weep  over  it  more  than  over  a  lost  child.  .  .  Sir,  if  gentlemen  will  not  sup- 
port us  in  a  war,  and  I  give  fair  notice  that  if  we  take  off  the  embargo" 
I  am  for  war — they  must  support  it,  or  they  will  sink  the  character  of  the 
nation.  If  they  will  support  neither  war  or  embargo,  if  they  destroy  the 
effect  of  both,  I  ask  you,  sir,  does  not  the  prostitution  of  the  character 
of  the  country  lie  at  their  doors?  If  they  mean  submission,  I  will  thank 
them  to  SS.J  so.  It  somehow  or  other  happens  that  Republicans  are  thought 
to  be  friendly  to  France,  and  Federalists  to  Great  Britain.  I  believe 
neither  imputation  to  be  correct  to  the  extent  to  which  it  is  carried.  But 
it  is  a  fact  that  the  British  ear  is  open  to  that  side  of  the  question  sooner 
than  to  us.  Now,  sir,  I  appeal  to  the  minority,  who  hold  the  destinies  of 
the  nation  in  their  grasp,  for  they  can  enforce  embargo  without  the  bay- 
onet— I  beg  them,  if  they  will  not  declare  war,  that  they  will  do  the  best 
they  can  for  their  country.  If  avarice  has  so  seized  on  our  hearts  as  to 
take  away  wholly  the  love  of  country,  (and  assuredly  it  has  if  we  submit) 
for  God's  sake  let  me  entreat,  gentlemen,  to  make  the  best  terms  they 
can  for  us,  to  secure  the  kind  protection  of  the  British  Government  for 
us — to  procure  us  the  miserable  boon  that  the  tax  on  us  may  be  collected 
here  without  compelling  us  to  go  to  Britain  to  pay  it.  Sir,  the  blood  which 
runs  through  my  veins  tells  me  I  was  not  born  to  be  a  British  subject;  it 
tells  me  that  the  opposition  to  us  must  have  sucked  the  same  milk — that 
we  are  of  the  same  family.  Then  let  us  with  one  heart  and  hand  take 
hold  of  war.96 

On  the  next  day,  January  31,  John  Rhea  of  Tennessee  urged 
that  March  4,  rather  than  June  1,  be  taken  as  the  date  for  re- 
peal. This,  he  declared,  would  give  sufficient  time  to  the  mer- 
chants, help  the  farmers,  allow  the  new  administration  to  com- 
mence its  career  with  "a  new  order  of  things,"  and  show  the 
nations  of  the  world  that  we  did  not  intend  to  abandon  the 
ocean  permanently.'^^  On  the  same  day,  J.  W.  Eppes  of  Vir- 
ginia pointed  out  the  present  opposition  of  the  United  States — 
the  insults  shown  by  the  belligerents  to  us  and  the  failure  of 
negotiations.^'' 

95  Ibid.,   p.  1230. 

96  Ibid.,    pp.  1237,  1238. 

97  Ibid.,   p.  1246. 


158      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

On  February  2,  the  repeal  of  the  embargo  was  again  taken 
up.  The  question  was  the  filling  of  the  blank  with  the  first 
day  of  June,  the  fourth  day  of  March,  or  the  fifteenth  day  of 
February.  Benjamin  Tallmadge  of  Connecticut  urged  a  speedy 
decision  or  repeal  at  an  early  date  on  the  ground  partly  of 
speculation.  Repeal,  he  urged,  would  cause  an  increase  in  the 
value  of  articles  for  export  from  ten  to  fifty  per  cent.  Post- 
poning repeal  prolonged  speculation.^^  On  the  same  day,  Henry 
Southard  of  New  Jersey,  in  answer  to  the  gloomy  pictures  drawn 
by  embargo  opponents,®^  exalted  the  beneficial  effects  on  manu- 
facturing.   He  said: 

The  seed  is  sown — the  germ  is  already  sprung.  By  means  of  the  em- 
bargo we  shall  reap  a  permanent  good.  Many  infant  manufactories  are 
already  established  throughout  the  country,  and  are  rapidly  progressing  to 
perfection.  Another  great  advantage  will  arise  by  inducing  domestic  in- 
dustry. Families  will  provide  themselves  with  the  necessaries  and  con- 
veniences of  life,  which  heretofore  they  have  produced  at  a  great  expense, 
and  which  manufactures  he  believed  would  render  the  country  more  inde- 
pendent of  foreign  nations  than  anything  else  which  could  be  devised. loo 

On  February  2,  the  House  in  Committee  of  the  Whole  refused 
by  a  vote  of  73  to  40  to  make  the  date  of  the  embargo's  repeal 
June  1.^°^  For  the  next  three  weeks  the  repeal  of  the  embargo 
and  the  adoption  of  non-intercourse  occupied  all  the  time  of  the 
House.  No  further  record  of  speeches,  however,  will  be  given 
until  February  20,  save  a  brief  reference  to  a  comment  of  D.  R, 
Williams  of  South  Carolina,  who,  on  February  17,  stated  that 
he  was  for  war  if  the  embargo  was  to  be  repealed,  and  that  the 
people  south  of  the  Delaware  were  for  war.  "But  you  have 
been  humbled,"  he  added  more  courteously  than  many  others 
had  done,  "into  an  acknowledgment  of  the  truth  of  the  declara- 
tion that  you  cannot  be  kicked  into  a  war,  because  the  Eastern 
people  will  not  follow  you. '  '^'^'-  On  Februaiy  20,  John  Randolph 
of  Roanoke,  spoke  against  a  vacillating  policy.    He  said : 

.  .  .The  motion  of  the  gentleman  from  Virginia  [W.  C.  Nicholas] — and 
I  beg  you,  sir,  to  recollect  from  whom  it  came,  the  influence  of  that  gentle - 


98  Ibid.,    p.  1268. 

99  Ibid.,   pp.  1230,  1305,  etc. 

100  Ibid.,   p.  1307. 

101  Ibid.,   p.  1328. 

102  Ibid.,    p.  1450. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  159 

man,  and  his  supposed  acquaintance  and  high  credit  with  the  Administra- 
tion— made  the  prices  of  commodities  start  in  a  night,  like  mushrooms; 
sales  were  made  to  a  great  amount;  when,  on  a  sudden,  as  if  by  the  stroke 
of  a  torpedo,  the  proceedings  of  this  House  are  benumbed.  The  Committee 
of  the  Whole,  after  the  vote  to  repeal  the  embargo,  is  discharged,  a  recom- 
mitment takes  place,  and  what  is  the  result?  The  mercantile  barometer 
not  only  went  down,  but  did  not  stop  at  the  point  at  which  it  was  before, 
it  fell  even  lower  than  ever.  It  now  is  fluctuating  a  little,  but  it  is  not  up 
to  the  point  at  which  it  stood  when  the  motion  was  originally  made.  Now, 
suppose  a  man  in  the  secret,  when  that  motion  was  made,  had  sold  out, 
perhaps  to  the  amount  of  half  a  million,  at  an  advance  of  from  25  to 
33  1-3  per  cent;  a  few  days  afterwards  he  would  be  able  to  buy  the  same 
commodity  at  perhaps  a  price  as  much  below  par  as  he  sold  it  above — 
making  a  difference  of  from  50  to  66  1-2  per  cent.  Should  such  gambling 
be  encouraged?  The  people  want  to  know  what  way  we  are  going — 
whether  North  or  South,  East  or  West.ios 

On  the  same  day,  G.  W.  Campbell  of  Tennessee,  spoke  in  op- 
position to  the  repeal  of  the  embargo.  In  common  with  D.  R. 
Williams  of  South  Carolina  he  urged  that  substitution  of  non- 
intercourse  for  the  embargo  would  relieve  one  part  of  the 
Union  and  impose  the  burden  on  another  part.  The  embargo, 
he  argued,  operated  equally  on  the  various  parts  of  the  Union, 
but  the  non-intercourse  would  press  hardest  on  the  southern 
and  western  states  which  were  largely  dependent  upon  the  im- 
mediate exchange  of  their  products  for  foreign  goods.  This, 
he  insisted,  would  throw  the  carrying  trade  to  the  eastern  mer- 
chants without  competition  and  would  place  a  premium  on  east- 
em  manufacturers  at  the  expense  of  southern  and  w^estern  far- 
mers, for  since  foreign  goods  were  excluded,  the  eastern  states 
could  charge  the  others  any  price  they  wanted  for  manufactured 
goods,  and  those  states  Avould  have  to  pay.  "Hence."  he  said, 
"the  non-intercourse  would  operate  partially  against  the  South- 
ern and  Western,  and  completely  in  favor  of  the  Eastern 
States,  and  hence  the  most  cogent  reasons  I  have  yet  discovered 
why  the  Eastern  gentlemen  are  almost  to  a  man  in  favor  of 
it."^°* 

A  little  later,  on  the  same  day,  Nathaniel  Macon,  favored  the 
continuance  of  the  embargo  as  the  only  alternative  to  war.  He 
declared  in  part : 


103  Ibid.,   pp.   1474,    1475. 

104  Ibid.,   p.    1483.      The   statement  just   quoted   on   eastern   sxjpport   proved   false. 


160      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

It  has  been  said,  and  great  pains  have  been  taken  to  establish  the  fact 
that  the  embargo  bears  harder  upon  the  Eastern  than  upon  the  Southern 
country.  The  reverse  appears  to  me  to  be  the  fact.  Upon  the  towns 
it  may  bear  harder  than  upon  the  country;  but  take  the  nation  at  large, 
and  the  embargo,  if  gentlemen  persist  in  charging  all  our  evils  on  the 
embargo,  bears  harder  on  the  South  than  on  the  East.  We  lose  the  capital 
of  the  trade,  whilst  they  lose  but  the  profits  to  be  made  upon  the  export 
and  import.     Can  the  profits  be  equal  to  the  capital?     Certainly  not.io'' 

Immediately  after  the  repeal  of  the  embargo  and  in  place  of 
that  measure  the  non-intercourse  act  was  passed.  It  was  entitled 
"An  Act  to  interdict  commercial  intercourse  between  the  United 
States  and  Great  Britain  and  France,  and  for  other  purposes." 
It  opened  up  trade  with  other  nations,  but  as  stated  in  the 
title  prohibited  trade  with  the  main  belligerents.  Only  the  last 
section  of  the  act,  which  was  approved  by  Jefferson  on  March 
1,  1809,  will  be  quoted  here : 

And  ie  it  further  enacted,  That  this  act  shall  continue  and  be  in  foicp 
until  the  end  of  the  next  session  of  Congress,  and  no  longer ;  and  that  th"^" 
act  la^'ing  an  embargo  on  all  ships  and  vessels  in  the  ports  and  harbors 
of  the  United  States,  and  the  several  acts  supplementary  thereto,  shall  be, 
and  the  same  were  hereby  repealed,  from  and  after  the  end  of  the  next 
session  of  Congress. i^e 

The  non-intercourse  measure  was  passed  by  a  vote  of  81  to 
40;  nineteen  members  were  absent  when  the  vote  was  taken. 
Of  the  latter,  five  were  from  Massachusetts,  three  from  Virginia, 
two  each  from  Pennsylvania  and  South  Carolina,  and  one  each 
from  New  Hampshire,  Connecticut,  New  York,  Ohio,  Tennessee, 
North  Carolina,  and  Georgia.  Williams  of  South  Carolina  and 
Campbell  of  Tennessee,  both  of  whom  had  fought  long  and  hard 
for  the  embargo,  were  among  those  absent.  They  in  common 
with  others  probably,  for  all  did  not  have  legitimate  reasons, 
hated  to  see  the  death  of  a  favorite  child.  Of  the  forty  votes 
cast  in  opposition  to  the  non-intercourse  act,  six  each  came  from 
Connecticut  and  Pennsylvania,  five  from  Virginia,  four  each 
from  Massachusetts  and  North  Carolina,  three  from  New  York, 
two  each  from  Vermont,  South  Carolina,  and  Georgia,  and  one 
apiece  from  New  Hampshire,  Rhode  Island,  New  Jersey,  Dela- 

105  Ibid.,   p.    1490. 

106  Ibid.,    p.    1830. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  161 

ware,  Maryland,  and  Kentucky/"^  It  is  thus  apparant  that 
sentiment  was  di\'ided.  ]\Iany  Southerners  opposed  the  non- 
intercourse  ;  others  favored  it  in  an  effort  to  retain  as  much  of  the 
embargo  policy  as  possible.  As  in  the  Senate,  many  strong  oppo- 
nents of  the  embargo,  such  as  Dana  and  Tallmadge  of  Connecti- 
cut, Gardenier  of  New  York,  Quincy  of  Massachusetts,  and 
others  voted  against  the  non-intercourse  act,  since  they  consider- 
ed a  partial  repeal  only  as  a  compromise  which  was  in  reality 
a  triumph  for  the  administration. 

Federalist  newspapers  did  not  regard  the  repeal  of  the  em- 
bargo with  unmixed  satisfaction,  for  non-intercourse  was  sub- 
stituted. An  item  in  a  Boston  paper  of  March  8,  1809,  \\Titten, 
however,  before  the  repeal,  read : 

The  miserable  Embargo  system  is  to  be  partially  repealed  on  Wednes- 
day next;  although  it  is  to  be  accompanied  and  coupled  with  a  measure 
equally  as  unjust,  equally  as  foolish,  stupid  and  unavailing,  as  the  original 
Embargo ;  and  which  its  insane  authors  will  be  compelled  to  abandon  with 
the  same  mark  of  folly,  the  same  portion  of  disgrace  and  derision;  which 
has  attached  to  their  Embargo  conduct.  Commiseration  with  our  suffering 
fellow  countr\Tnen  in  various  parts  of  the  community;  and  hoping  that 
this  measure  of  repeal ;  partial  as  it  is,  vdU.  operate  to  remove  a  part  of 
the  oppressive  burdens  which  have  near  crushed  them,  we  thank  heaven 
for  even  this  scanty  boon.  .  .los 

Another  Boston  paper,  dated  two  days  later,  condemned  the 
non-intercourse  act  as  a  "deceptive  and  wicked  law.""®  A  New 
York  paper  on  the  following  day  opposed  the  non-intercourse 
bill  as  the  "most  contemptible  piece  of  knavery"  ever  passed 
by  any  administration  and  intended  to  bring  war  with  Great 
Britain.""  A  Connecticut  paper  declared  four  days  later :  ' '  Our 
weak  and  wicked  administration  were  so  frightened  by  the 
Legislatures  of  Connecticut  and  Massachusetts,  that  thej^  have 
relinquished  the  embargo  and  substituted  non-intercourse.  Do 
these  poltroons  suppose  that  the  people  -vvill  not  discover  their 
folly  and  cowardice?""^ 

Another  New  England  paper  declared  a  week  later : 


107  Ibid.,  p.   1541. 

108  Columbian   Centinel,   March   8,    1809. 

109  Reperetory,  March   10,   1809. 

110  New   York   Herald,    March    11,    1809. 

111  Connecticut    Courant,    March    15,    1809. 


162      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

The  Baltimore  Whig,  one  of  the  most  furious  of  the  Democratic  papers, 
speaking  of  the  late  session  of  Congress  says,  '  The  contradictory  measures 
of  this  session  defy  all  national  investigation;  they  are  too  childish  to  be 
ridiculed,  and  too  trifling  to  he  despised.'  This  is  too  true;  in  addition 
to  all  the  other  evils  of  the  Embargo,  it  has  cost  the  country  near  200,000 
dollars  to  pay  the  members  of  Congress  for  debating  upon,  and  wrangling 
about  it.  .  .112 

The  same  paper,  after  commenting  on  the  provisions  of  the 
non-intercourse  bill,  declared :  * '  Such  are  the  leading  features 
of  this  odious  law;  which  cannot  be  called  a  repeal  of  the  em- 
bargo, but  a  mere  take  iri  of  the  public ;  for  of  all  the  important 
places  in  the  windward  or  leward  Islands,  St.  Bartholomew 
only  is  open  to  us.  "^^^ 

A  different  view  of  the  matter  was  taken  in  an  article  in  a 
Baltimore  paper  of  earlier  date.  This  article  insisted  that  while 
trade  was  prohibited  with  France,  the  part  of  Italy  under  Na- 
poleon's control,  the  British  Isles,  and  Gibraltar  it  was  open  in 
Russia,  Sweden,  Denmark,  Prussia,  Turkey,  Germany,  the  Hanse 
Towns,  Holland,  Spain,  Portugal,  Sicily,  and  all  other  parts  of 
the  world  "not  subject  to  or  in  possession  of  Great  Britain  or 
France.""* 

Another  administration  paper  published  in  Newburyport, 
Massachusetts,  charged  the  Federalists  with  inconsistency.  One 
item  read : 

Every  day  gives  further  proof  that  the  only  principle  of  action  with 
the  leading  federalists  of  the  day,  is  opposition  to  whatever  course  our 
government  may  pursue.  Their  objection  now  is,  that  the  embargo  is  about 
to  be  taken  off  in  wrath  to  punish  the  eastern  states  by  the  vexation  and 
loss  which  will  attend  whatever  may  be  risked  on  the  high  seas. us 

A  Vermont  paper  repeated  the  charge:  "...  The  federal- 
ists, who  have  continually  clamored  against  the  continuance  of 
the  embargo,  invariably  voted  against  its  repeal  in  both  houses. 
What  kind  of  consistency  is  this?""^ 

Josiah  Quincy,  who  believed  the  partial  repeal  a  Jeffersonian 
victory,  wrote  to  a  friend  on  February  29,  two  days  after  the 

112  Massachusetts   Spy,    or    Worcester   Gazette,   March    22,    1809. 

113  Ibid.,   March   22,    1809. 

114  Baltimore  Evening   Post,   March   8,    1809. 

115  Statesman,   March    9,    1809. 

116  Danville   North   Star,   March   18,    1809. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  163 

repeal:  "Jefferson  has  triumphed.  His  intrigues  have  prevail- 
ed, Non-Intercourse  will  be  substituted  for  Embargo.  The  Non- 
Intercourse  bill  passed  81  ayes,  40  nays,  all  the  Federalists 
voting  against  the  bill,  except  Taggart  and  Livermore.  ""^ 

The  view  just  quoted  from  Quincy,  however,  was  incorrect. 
The  embargo  was  repealed  to  avoid  civil  war.  Jefferson  gave  in 
only  as  a  sort  of  necessary  compromise.  A  party  revolt  was  in- 
augurated by  Joseph  Story  and  Ezekiel  Bacon.  Numerous  quo- 
tations showing  the  danger  of  a  civil  war  have  already  been 
given;  a  few  more  will  now  be  cited.  On  January  4,  1809, 
Joseph  Story  wrote  to  a  friend  that  the  "Essex  junto"  had  re- 
solved to  separate  the  eastern  states  from  the  Union,  and  if  the 
embargo  continued  the  plan  might  be  supported  by  the  yeo- 
manry.^^^  On  January  24,  AVilliam  Plumer  wrote  to  Nicholas 
Oilman,  a  New  Jersey  senator,  that  there  appeared  to  be  a  spirit 
hostile  to  the  existence  of  our  government  in  New  England, 
"and  even  in  New  York,"  and  that  people  were  now  convers- 
ing on  the  dissolution  of  the  union,  as  an  event  rather  to  be 
desired  than  avoided."^ 

When  Jefferson  was  a  very  old  man,  "W.  B.  Giles,  a  Virginia 
senator  and  administration  leader  at  the  time  of  the  embargo, 
wrote  him  concerning  the  repeal,  and  his  own  intervention  be- 
tween the  president  and  John  Quincy  Adams.  Jefferson  in  his 
reply  referred  to  his  poor  memory  and  his  failure  to  recall  the 
intervention,  and  then  passed  on  to  Adams'  visit,  his  apologies, 
and  remarks.     He  said,  in  part : 

He  [Adams]  spoke  then  of  the  dissatisfaction  of  the  eastern  portion  of 
our  confederacy  with  the  restraints  of  the  embargo  then  existing,  and  their 
restlessness  under  it.  That  there  was  nothing  which  might  not  be  attempt- 
ed to  rid  themselves  of  it.  That  he  had  information  of  the  most  unquestion- 
able certainty,  that  certain  citizens  of  the  eastern  States  (I  think  he  named 
Massachusetts  particularly)  were  in  negotiation  with  agents  of  the  British 
government,  the  object  of  which  was  an  agreement  that  the  New  England 
States  should  take  no  further  part  in  the  war  then  going  on;  that,  with- 
out formally  declaring  their  separation  from  the  Union  of  the  States, 
they  should  withdraw  from  all  aid  and  obedience  to  them;  that  their  navi- 
gation and  commerce  should  be  free  from  restraint  and  interruption  by  the 


117  Life  of  Josiah  Quincy,  by  his  son  Edmund  Quincy,  pp.  185,  186. 

118  Plumer,   William,    Life    of    William   Plumer,    p.    369. 
lie  Ibid.,   p.    368. 


164      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

British ;  that  they  should  be  considered  and  treated  by  them  as  neutrals, 
and  as  such  might  conduct  themselves  towards  both  parties;  and,  at  the 
close  of  the  war  be  at  liberty  to  rejoin  the  confederacy.  He  assured  me 
that  there  was  eminent  danger  that  the  convention  would  take  place;  that 
the  temptations  were  such  as  might  debauch  many  from  their  fidelity  to 
the  Union;  and  that,  to  enable  its  friends  to  make  head  against  it,  the 
repeal  of  the  embargo  was  absolutely  necessary.  I  expressed  a  just  sense 
of  the  merit  of  this  information,  and  of  the  importance  of  the  disclosure 
to  the  safety  and  even  the  salvation  of  our  country;  and  however  reluct- 
antly I  was  to  abandon  the  measure,  (a  measure  which  persevered  in  a 
little  longer,  we  had  subsequent  and  satisfactory  assurance  would  have 
effected  its  object  completely)  from  that  moment,  and  influenced  by  that 
information,  I  saw  the  necessity  of  abandoning  it,  and  instead  of  effect- 
ing our  purposes  by  tliis  peaceful  weapon,  we  must  fight  it  out,  or  break 
the  Union.  I  then  recommended  to  yield  to  the  necessity  of  a  repeal  of 
the  embargo  and  to  endeavor  to  supply  its  place  by  the  best  substitute 
in  which  they  could  procure  a  general  concurrence.120 

Joseph  Story  also  gave  an  account  of  the  repeal  which  shows 
that  Jefferson  held  out  for  the  embargo  as  long  as  possible. 
Story  declared  in  a  letter  to  Edward  Everett : 

The  whole  influence  of  the  Administration  was  directly  Ijrought  to  boar 
upon  Mr.  Ezekiel  Bacon  and  myself  to  seduce  us  from  what  we  considered 
a  great  duty  to  our  country,  and  especially  to  New  England.  We  were 
scolded,  privately  consulted,  and  argued  with  by  the  Administration  and 
its  friends  on  that  occasion.  I  knew  at  the  time  that  Mr.  Jefferson  had 
no  ulterior  measure  in  view,  and  was  determined  on  protracting  the  em- 
bargo for  an  indefinite  period,  even  for  years.  I  was  well  satisfied  that 
such  a  course  would  not  and  could  not  be  borne  by  New  England,  and 
would  bring  on  a  direct  rebellion.  It  would  be  ruin  to  the  whole  country. 
Yet  Mr.  Jefferson,  with  his  usual  visionary  obstinacy,  was  determined  to 
maintain  it;  and  the  New  England  Republicans  were  to  be  made  the  in- 
struments. Mr.  Bacon  and  myself  resisted ;  and  measures  were  concerted  by 
us  with  the  aid  of  Pennsylvania  to  compel  him  to  abandon  his  mad  scheme. 
For  this  he  never  forgave  me.121 

One  other  quotation  in  support  of  the  view  that  Jefferson's 
hand  was  forced  in  the  repeal  of  the  embargo  will  be  given.  It 
was  written  by  Jefferson  himself  to  Henry  Dearborn,  not  years 
afterwards  when  his  memory  was  dulled,  but  on  July  16,  1810, 
wlien  the  events  were  comparatively  fresh  in  his  mind.    He  said : 

The  Federalists,  during  their  short-lived  ascendancy,  have  nevertheless  by 
forcing  us   from   the  embargo,   inflicted   a   wound   on   our   interests   which 


120  Jefferson,    Writings,  Vol.  X,   pp.   353,   354. 

121  Story  W.   W.   Life  and  Letters  of  Joseph  Story,  Vol.   I,   p.    187. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  165 

can  never  be  cured,  and  on  our  affections  which  will  require  time  to  cica- 
trize. I  ascribe  all  this  to  one  pseudo-republican,  Story.  He  came  on  (in 
place  of  Crownenshield  I  believe)  and  staid  only  a  few  days,  long  enough, 
however,  to  get  complete  hold  of  Bacon,  who  giving  in  to  his  representa- 
tions, became  panick  struck,  and  communicated  his  panick  to  his  colleagues 
and  they  to  a  majority  of  the  sound  members  of  Congress.  They  believed 
in  the  alternative  of  repeal  or  civil  war,  and  produced  the  fatal  measure 
of  repeal.  This  is  the  immediate  parent  of  all  our  present  evils,  and  has 
reduced  us  to  a  low  standing  in  the  eyes  of  the  world.122 

The  administration,  it  may  be  stated  by  way  of  brief  sum- 
mary of  this  and  the  preceding  chapter,  backed  by  its  friends, 
sought  to  develop  opinion  in  support  of  the  embargo  system  by 
favorable  newspaper  accounts,  by  exalting  the  beneficial  effect 
on  manufactures  and  the  saving  of  property,  by  lightening  the 
operation  of  the  embargo  through  permits  granted  to  influential 
men,  to  trade  under  certain  restrictions,  and  by  town  and  state 
resolutions  favorable  to  Jefferson  and  the  embargo  system. 

As  time  passed,  however,  opinion  steadily  developed  against 
the  restrictive  laws.  Newspapers  skillfully  fanned  the  flame  of 
opposition.  Sailors,  fishermen,  and  other  sufferers  held  meetings 
and  prepared  petitions.  Smuggling  developed  into  armed  oppo- 
sition and  public  opinion  supported  the  law  violations.  Increas- 
ing numbers  declared  the  embargo  unconstitional.  Federalist 
votes  increased.  Catchy  poems,  songs,  and  catechisms  strength- 
ened opposition.  Town  meetings  condemned  the  measure  in 
harshest  terms.  Newspapers  advised  resistance.  Governors  re- 
fused to  enforce  the  law.  Threats  of  disunion  came  thick  and 
fast  from  New  England.  Jefferson,  in  order  to  prevent  civil 
war,  reluctantly  gave  in,  and  the  non-intercourse  act  was  sub- 
stituted for  the  embargo,  for  he  himself  said  in  a  longer  quo- 
tation previously  given:  "I  saw  the  necessity  of  abandoning 
it,  and  instead  of  effecting  our  purposes  by  this  peaceful  weapon, 
we  must  fight  it  out.  or  break  the  union.  "^-" 


122  Writi7if!S  of  Thomas  Jefferson,  Vol.   IX,  p.  277.      Quoted  in   part  in   Story,   W.  W., 
Life   and  Letters  of  Jodei>h  Story,  Vol.    I,   p.    1H6. 

123  Jefferson,    Writinffs,  Vol.   X,   p.   354. 


CHAPTER  VII 

EFFECT  OF  THE  EMBAKGO  ON  MANUFACTURES 

One  of  the  common  arguments  used  by  the  friends  of  the 
embargo  was  that  it  would  help  develop  manufactures.  The  fol- 
lowing item  is  typical : 

It  is  not  denied  that  an  embargo  imposes  on  us  privations.  But  what 
are  these  compared  with  its  effects  on  those  who  have  driven  us  into 
the  measure?  — We  shall  be  deprived  of  market  for  our  superfluities.  They 
will  feel  the  want  of  necessaries.  The  profits  of  our  labour  will  be  dis- 
[ex]  tinguished.    The  supplies  that  feed  theirs  will  fail. 

An  embargo  will  not  be  without  advantages,  separate  from  the  imme- 
diate purpose  it  is  to  answer.  It  forces  frugality  in  the  use  of  things, 
depending  on  habit  alone  for  the  gratiiication  they  yield.  It  fosters  appli- 
cations of  labor  which  contributes  to  our  internal  sufficiency  for  our  wants. 
It  will  extend  those  household  manufactures,  which  are  particularly  adapted 
to  the  present  stage  of  our  society.  And  it  favors  the  introduction  of 
particular  branches  of  others,  highly  important  in  their  nature,  which  will 
proceed  of  themselves  when  once  put  into  motion,  and  moreover  by  attract- 
ing from  abroad  hands  suitable  for  the  service,  will  take  the  fewer  from 
the  cultivation  of  our  soili 

References  have  already  been  made  to  the  beneficial  effect  in 
the  Congressional  debates,  but  a  few  other  instances  will  be 
given  now  and  the  subject  will  be  considered  in  more  detail.  A 
House  report  brought  in  by  Thomas  Newton,  January  11,  1808, 
against  a  Philadelphia  petition  for  modifications  of  the  embargo 
pointed  out  some  expected  benefits  in  the  development  of  new 
and  unexpected  treasures.  According  to  the  report,  England 
would  be  unable  to  get  her  raw  materials  any  longer  from  the 
United  States,  and  of  course  the  United  States  would  seek  to 
use  her  own  products  as  much  as  possible.  The  result  would 
naturally  be  favorable  to  the  development  of  our  own  manu- 
factures.^ 

One  of  the  friends  of  the  embargo  introduced  on  April  25, 

1  Northampton   Repuhlican   Spy,   January    13,    1808. 

2  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.  XVII,   p.   1387. 

166 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  167 

the  following  resolution  in  the  House:  "Resolved,  That  the 
members  of  the  House  of  Representatives  will  appear  at  their 
next  meeting  clothed  in  the  manufactures  of  their  own 
country. '  '^  A  small  storm  at  once  occured.  Nathaniel  Macon  of 
North  Carolina,  a  warm  friend  of  the  embargo,  said  that  the 
resolution  could  not  be  enforced.  If  intended  as  a  pledge,  he 
declared,  he  was  unwilling  to  give  it ;  if  to  be  enforced,  he  denied 
the  authority  of  Congress.*  John  Rhea  of  Tennessee  declared 
that  he  would  dress  in  any  clothing  he  chose,  the  ''resolution 
to  the  contrary  notwithstanding. '  '^  John  W.  Eppes  of  Virginia, 
son-in-law  of  Jefferson,  admitted  that  the  resolution  could  not 
be  enforced,  but  expressed  a  wish  that  not  only  every  man  in  the 
House,  but  every  man  in  the  nation  could  dress  in  home  manu- 
factures. He  contended  that  "the  proposition  was  a  valuable 
one,  and  he  wished  to  God  that  the  ladies  could  be  placed  in  a 
situation  to  adopt  a  similar  resolution."  Eppes  declared  that 
if  he  were  to  appear  in  clothing  manufactured  in  his  o^vn  state, 
he  would  wear  homely  garb,  but  if  the  resolution  passed,  he 
would  have  cloth  manufactured  in  his  own  family  before  the 
next  fall.  He  estimated  that  a  million  men  wore  broadcloth 
coats  in  the  United  States  and  that  if  all  were  made  here  an 
immense  saving  would  be  effected.*' 

Macon  was  again  on  his  feet.  He  said  that  it  was  not  fair 
that  single  men,  like  himself,  "who  had  no  wives  at  home  to 
make  them  coats,  should  not  only  be  reproached  for  their  mis- 
fortune, but  pointed  at  as  sinners."  He  declared  that  he  had 
just  bought  himself  a  suit,  but  that  he  could  not  get  one  of 
American  manufacture.  In  fact,  he  argued,  that  a  hat  obtained 
for  him  by  his  friend  Nelson  of  Maryland  "was  all  that  he 
could  obtain  of  American  manufacture. ' '  He  insisted  that  Eppes 
could  not  persuade  a  single  lady  in  the  nation  to  agree  to  the 
resolution.^  The  mover  of  the  resolution,  W.  B.  Bibb  of  Geor- 
gia, however,  must  have  seen  that  the  sentiment  was  decidedly 
against  him;  consequently,  after  saying  that  he  had  hoped  his 


3  Ihid.,  Vol.  XVIII,  p.  2283. 

4  Ihid.,  p.  2283. 

5  Ihid.,  p.  2283. 

6  Ihid.,  pp.  2283,  2284. 

7  Ihid.,  p.  2284. 


168      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

motion  would  be  unanimously  adopted  and  that  he  did  not  want 
to  provoke  debate,  he  withdrew  it.® 

On  November  24,  W.  B.  Giles  of  Virginia  declared  in  the 
Senate,  while  opposing  the  repeal  of  the  embargo,  that  manu- 
factures were  improving  as  a  result  of  that  measure.  He  said : 
"I  rejoice,  indeed,  to  see  our  infant  manufactures  growing  into 
importance,  and  that  the  most  successful  experiment  has  attend- 
ed every  attempt  at  improvement.'"*  Other  friends  of  the  em- 
bargo likewise  emphasized  this  point.  Some  of  the  opponents 
of  the  embargo  were  willing  to  admit  a  stimulus  to  manufactures, 
but  they  of  course  contended  that  the  evil  far  outweighed  any 
good.^°  Moreover,  they  usually  pronounced,  as  did  Josiah  Mas- 
ters of  New  York,  the  effort  to  make  the  United  States  a  manu- 
facturing nation  a  visionary  one." 

John  Howe,  in  one  of  his  letters  to  Sir  George  Prevost,  prob- 
ably written  in  the  fall  of  1808,  ridiculed  the  idea  of  the  United 
States  becoming  a  manufacturing  country.  He  declared  that 
twice  as  much  could  be  made  by  exporting  raw  materials,  for  two- 
thirds  of  the  land  was  yet  uncultivated  and  a  common  laborer 
earned  from  one  dollar  to  a  dollar  and  fifty  cents  per  day.^^ 
Later,  in  answering  one  of  Prevost 's  questions  he  referred  to 
increasing  manufactures  of  munitions  of  war.^^ 

At  the  opposite  extreme  from  Masters  and  Howe  stood  en- 
thusiastic and  prosperous  manufacturers.  One  of  these,  before 
the  embargo  had  been  in  effect  six  months,  wrote  from  Baltimore 
to  Savannah :  ' '  Instead  of  receiving  Cotton  Goods  from  Eng- 
land, we  may  supply  that  country.  It  will  be  wise  for  the 
manufacturers  to  come  in  time  to  this  country.  This  is  a  just 
enthusiasm,  and  promises  good  to  our  country."^* 

Albert  Gallatin  in  his  famous  report  on  manufactures  in  1809 
declared  that  the  interference  of  belligerent  powers  with  neutral 
trade  "by  forcing  industry  and  capital  into  other  channels"  had 


8  Ibid.,   p.   2284. 

9  Ibid.,   Vol.   XIX,    p.    102. 

10  Ibid.,  pp.  445,  446. 

11  Ibid.,   p.    610. 

12  "Secret  Reports  of  John  Howe,"  American  Historical  Review,  Vol.  XVII,  p.  334. 

13  Ibid.,   pp.    353,    354. 

14  Yirginia   Argus,    May    24,    1808. 


TBE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  169 

''broken  inveterate  habits,  and  given  a  general  impulse  to  which 
must  be  ascribed  the  general  increase  of  manufacture  during  the 
two  last  years.  "^' 

On  November  29,  1809,  Madison,  former  Secretary  of  State  for 
Jefferson,  who  had  been  inaugurated  as  president,  clothed  in  the 
first  inaugural  suit  of  American  broadcloth,  observed  in  his  first 
annual  message: 

In  a  cultivation  of  the  materials  and  the  extension  of  useful  manu- 
factures, more  especially  in  the  general  application  to  household  fabrics, 
we  behold  a  rapid  diminution  of  our  dependence  on  foreign  supplies.  Xor 
is  it  unworthy  of  reflection  that  this  revolution  in  our  pursuits  and  habits 
is  in  no  slight  degree  a  consequence  of  those  impolitic  and  arbitrary  edicts 
by  which  contending  nations,  in  endeavoring  each  of  them  to  obstruct  our 
trade  with  the  other,  have  so  far  abridged  our  means  of  procuring  the 
productions  and  manufactures  of  which  our  own  are  now  taking  the 
place.16 

Madison  again  referred  to  the  extension  of  useful  manufac- 
tures and  the  substitution  of  domestic  for  foreign  supplies  in 
his  message  of  December  5,  1810.  as  a  cause  for  satisfaction,  and 
"of  itself  more  than  a  recompense  for  their  privations  and 
losses  resulting  from  foreign  injustice,  which  furnished  the  gen- 
eral impulse  required  for  its  accomplishments."  He  even  sug- 
gested to  Congress  that  it  might  be  worth  while  to  guard  the 
rising  manufactures  by  a  commercial  tariff.^^ 

Madison,  moreover,  talked  to  callers  on  the  subject  of  manu- 
factures. Thus  on  June  1,  1809  (  ?)  he  talked  for  an  hour  with 
an  English  traveller  named  John  Melish.  According  to  the 
latter,  the  president  said  that  manufactures  "had  progressed  in 
a  wonderful  degree,  and  went  far  to  supply  the  internal  demand, 
which  was  one  great  and  permanent  good  that  had  risen  oul  of  a 
sy.stem  fraught  with  many  evils."  He  declared  that  these  manu- 
factures were  so  firmly  established  that  they  would  continue  to 
increase,  but  that  the  increase  of  wealth  and  population  was  so 
great  in  the  United  States  that,  if  trade  were  opened,  "there 
would  still  be  a  very  great  demand  for  British  manufacturers."'^ 


15  American  >State   Papers,  Series  Finance,   Vol.    II,    p.   427. 

16  Bishop,  J.  L.,  A  History  of  American  Manufactures,  Vol.  II,  p.  136,  and  Rich- 
ardson, R.,  Messages  and  Papers  of  the  Presidents,  Vol.  1,  p.  477.  See  also  the 
National  Intelligencer,  March  6,  1809. 

17  Richardson,  R.,  Messages  mid  Papers  of  the  Presidents,  Vol.   I,  pp.  484,  485. 

18  Melish,   .lohn.    Travels,   p.    289. 


170      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

-  Jefferson,  of  course,  was  more  interested  than  anyone  else  in 
claiming  all  possible  benefits  for  the  embargo  system;  hence  he 
referred  repeatedly  to  the  beneficial  effects  of  the  embargo  on 
manufactures.  For  instance,  November  8,  1808,  in  his  eighth 
annual  message,  he  said: 

The  situation  into  which  we  have  thus  been  forced,  has  impelled  us  to 
apply  a  portion  of  our  industry  and  capital  to  internal  manufacture  and 
impro\ements.  The  extent  of  this  conversion  is  daily  increasing,  and  little 
doubt  remains  that  the  establishments  formed  and  forming  will — under 
the  auspices  of  cheaper  materials  and  subsistence,  the  freedom  of  labor 
from  taxation  with  us,  and  of  protecting  duties  and  prohibitions — become 
permanent. 19 

Many  of  the  governors  in  their  inaugurals  or  other  speeches, 
referred  to  the  development  of  manufactures  as  a  result  of 
restrictions  on  commerce,  though,  unlike  Gallatin,  Madison,  and 
Jefferson,  they  did  not,  ordinarily  give  specific  credit  to  the  em- 
bargo. The  governor  of  Pennsylvania,  Simon  Snyder,  said,  in 
his  annual  message  of  1809 : 

It  is  also  a  cause  of  much  satisfaction  to  observe  that  in  proportion  to 
the  difficulty  of  access  to,  and  commerce  with,  foreign  nations,  is  the  zeal 
and  exertion  to  supply  our  wants  by  home  manufactures.  Our  mills  and 
furnaces  are  greatly  multiplied;  new  beds  of  ore  have  been  discovered, 
and  the  industry  and  enterprise  of  our  citizens  are  turning  them  to  the 
most  useful  purposes.  Many  new  and  highly  valuable  manufactories  have 
been  established,  and  we  now  make  in  Pennsylvania  various  articles  of 
domestic  use,  for  which  two  years  since,  we  were  wholly  dependent  upon 
foreign  nations. 

We  have  lately  had  established  in  Philadelphia  large  shot  manufactories, 
floor  cloth  manufactories,  and  a  queen's  ware  pottery  upon  an  extensive 
scale.  These  are  all  in  successful  operation,  independent  of  immense  quan- 
tities of  cotton  and  wool,  tlax  and  hemp,  leather  and  iron,  which  are  manu- 
factured in  our  state,  and  which  save  our  country  the  annual  export  of 
millions  of   dollars.20 

Governor  Stone  of  North  Carolina  spoke  hopefully  of  the  "ad- 
vances already  made,  and  hourly  making"  in  the  development 
of  local  manufactures.^^     Governor  Irwin  of  Georgia  declared: 

Already    a   spirit    of    patriotism    and    enterprise    has    manifested    itself 


19  Jefferson,    Writings,    Vol.    IX,    pp.    223,    224.      For   other   expressions    of   opinion, 
see    ibid.,    pp.    226,    239. 

20  Pennsylvania   Archives,    Papers   of   the   Governors,   Vol.    IV,    pp.    1785-1817,    677. 
See   also   Boston   Gazette,   July   7,    1808. 

21  Bishop,   op.   cit.,   Vol.    II,    p.    141. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  171 

generally,  and  our  citizens,  foreseeing  the  evils  which  must  result  from 
too  great  reliance  on  articles  of  foreign  manufacture,  are  shaking  off 
those  fashionable  fetters,  which  held  them  in  a  state  of  ser\'ile  dependence 
upon  other  nations,  and  making  every  exertion  to  clothe  themselves  in 
fabrics  of  their  own.  Will  you  not  second  their  efforts,  and,  by  rendering 
all  the  aid  in  your  power,  give  a  spur  to  their  laudable  pursuits  ?22 

Newspapers  writers  frequently  commented  on  the  develop- 
ment of  manufactures  in  Georgia  and  the  South  generally.  A 
significant  item  follows:  "Home  made  cotton  cloth,  of  a  good 
quality,  and  a  yard  wide,  is  retailing  in  Savannah  at  half  a 
dollar  per  yard.  A  few  weeks  ago  one  of  the  Georgia  farmers 
sold  there  a  thousand  yards  of  his  cloth,  all  manufactured  in 
his  own  family.  "^^ 

Foreign  travellers,  as  well  as  native  Americans,  point  out  the 
development  of  American  manufactures  in  1808  and  1809.  John 
Melish,  an  English  merchant,  travelled  in  the  United  States  in 
1806  and  1807,  and  again  in  1809,  1810,  and  1811.  After  re- 
ferring to  his  wrecked  mercantile  business  in  Savannah,  he 
described  his  journey  north.  He  spent  one  night  with  a  farmer 
who  lived  about  half  way  between  Sparta  and  Greensburg,Geor- 
gia.  At  the  farmer's  home,  he  found  the  family  busily  engaged 
in  manufacturing.  Some  of  the  articles,  he  said,  were  "hand- 
some" and  all  were  good.  This  family  reported  that  they  sup- 
plied themselves  and  in  addition  sold  a  "considerable  quantity 
of  goods.  "^*  "While  still  in  Georgia,  Melish  described  the  effects 
of  the  commercial  restrictions  on  manufactures  as  follows: 

During  this  journey  to  the  upper  country,  I  made  every  inquiry  that  I 
could  regarding  the  state  of  its  commercial  concerns,  and  I  was  satisfied 
that  it  had  undergone  a  great  revolution  since  I  was  in  the  country  before. 
The  staple  commodity  of  the  state  is  cotton,  and  it  had  so  fallen  in  value 
as  to  cut  off  upwards  of  one-third  of  the  income  of  the  country.  It  followed 
that  the  inhabitants  must  curtail  their  expenditure  in  proportion.  I  ac- 
cordingly found  that  all  the  people  in  the  interior  of  the  country  were 
clothed  in  homespun.  In  almost  every  family  a  cotton  manufactory  was 
to  be  seen,  and  in  some  instances  they  had  introduced  spinning  upon  a 
pretty  large  scale,  by  jennies.  At  a  parade  of  the  militia,  at  Augusta, 
I  was  told  that  out  of  500  men  only  two  were  to  be  found  who  had  a 
single  article  of  British  manufacture  about  them.     It  had  become  fashion- 


22  Ibid.,   pp.   141,   142. 

23  Baltimore   Federal  Republican   and   Commercial   Gazette,   August   19,    1808. 

24  Melish,  John,   Travels,  p.   263. 


172      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

able  everywhere  to  wear  homespun ;  and  from  the  very  substantial  stufp 
the  people  were  making,  and  the  agreeable  employment  it  afforded  to  the 
young  women  of  the  country,  I  was  convinced  that  this  trade  would  in- 
crease, probably  to  nearly  the  total  exclusion  of  British  goods  from  the 
state.  .  .25 

Very  frequently  in  the  course  of  his  travels,  Melish  was  led 
to  refer  to  manufactures.  At  New  York  he  was  astonished  to 
see  the  rapid  progress  of  manufactures  within  the  course  of  a 
few  years.^^  Later,  in  describing  conditions  in  Ohio,  he  referred 
in  almost  the  identical  words  of  Gallatin's  report  to  the  forced 
diversion  within  the  last  twenty  years  of  American  capital  to 
other  channels,  the  breaking  of  "inveterate  habits"  and  the  giv- 
ing of  "a  general  impulse,  to  which  must  be  ascribed  the  great 
increase  of  manufactures  during  the  last  two  years.  "^^  Again, 
in  describing  conditions  in  western  New  York,  Melish  wrote 
with  more  enthusiasm  than  judgment  perhaps : 

A  new  era  has  commenced  in  the  United  States.  Britain  is  destined  to 
be  no  longer  the  manufacturer  for  America;  the  seeds  of  manufactures  are 
sown  throughout  the  country,  never  to  be  rooted  out;  and,  so  far  from  the 
interior  being  dependent  upon  the  cities  as  heretofore,  the  cities  will,  in 
all  probability,  become  dependent  upon  it.28 

D.  B.  Warden,  a  man  of  the  period  whose  book  entitled 
Statistical,  Political,  and  Historical  Account  of  the  United 
States  was  published  in  Edinburgh  in  1819,  was  impressed  by 
the  ingenuity  of  the  Americans  in  encouraging  the  development 
of  manufactures.     He  wrote: 

Foreign  artists  and  tradesmen  were  encouraged  to  settle  in  the  countr,v. 
The  implements,  tools,  and  even  the  furniture  of  emigrant  mechanics,  were 
made  free  of  duty.  In  Pennsylvania  such  persons  were  admitted  as  free- 
holders on  the  day  of  their  arrival,  provided  they  declared  their  intentions 
of  becoming  citizens  within  the  time  prescribed  by  law.  A  knowledge  of 
machinery,  and.  processes  for  the  saving  of  labour,  were  communicated, 
through  the  daily  journals,  to  all  descriptions  of  people.  .  .  Mineralogy 
became  an  object  of  attention,  and  every  district  was  ransacked  for  useful 
minerals.  The  skins  of  various  animals,  hitherto  useless,  were  preserved 
and  manufactured;   and  the  farmers  were  induced  by  men  of  science  to 

25  Ibid.,  p.  267. 

26  Ibid.,   p.    274. 

27  Ibid.,    p.    438. 

28  Ibid.,    pp.    534,    535. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  173 

direct  their  attention  to  the  cultivation  of  native  and  exotic  plants,  which 
had  been  found  useful  in  the  arts  or  nianufactures.2» 

In  1808,  the  manufactures  of  South  Carolina  were  smaU,  but 
while  the  privations  of  the  embargo  were  becoming  evident,  Dr. 
Shecut  published  a  series  of  strong  addresses  in  the  Charleston 
City  Gazette  in  an  effort  to  create  a  spirit  favorable  to  domestic 
manufactures.  The  establishment  of  a  South  Carolina  "Home- 
spun Society"  was  discussed.  This  society,  with  headquarters 
at  Charleston,  was  to  have  a  capital  of  $150,000,  divided  into 
fifteen  thousand  shares  of  ten  dollars  each.  One  thousand  of 
these  shares  were  reserved  for  the  legislature.^"  When,  how- 
ever, several  public  meetings  had  been  held,  and  the  company 
was  finally  organized,  its  capital  apparently  dwindled  to  thirty 
thousand  dollars.  The  object  of  this  company  was  the  promo- 
tion of  the  manufacture  of  common  domestic  fabrics.  Some 
ground  was  purchased,  and  the  cornerstone  of  the  manufactur- 
ing establishment  was  soon  laid.  A  procession  of  over  four 
thousand  and  a  still  larger  audience  took  part  in  the  celebration. 
An  address  of  congratulation  was  delivered  by  William  Lough- 
ton  Smith.  Approval  and  support  of  the  measure  were  con- 
sidered tests  of  patriotism.^^ 

Similar  action  was  general  both  north  and  south  of  Charles- 
ton. At  Richmond,  Virginia,  W.  H.  Cabell,  William  Wirt,  Wil- 
liam Foushee  Sr.,  Peji^on  Randolph,  and  Thomas  Ritchie  issued 
an  address  urging  all  Virginians  to  adopt  such  a  system  of  do- 
mestic manufacture  ''as  would  render  them  independent  of 
foreign  nations. '  '^^ 

During  the  year  1808  the  first  flint  glass  manufactory  was 
established  in  Pittsburgh  by  Messrs.  BakcAvclls  and  Co.,  and  a 
steam  flouring  mill  was  also  built.^^  In  Maryland  the  Union 
Manufacturing  Company  was  incorporated  with  a  capital  of  one 
million  dollars.     This  capital  was  divided  into  twenty  thousand 


29  Warden,  D.  B.,  Statistical,  Political,  and  Historical  Account  of  the  United 
States,  Vol.   Ill,    p.   263. 

30  National    Iiite.lligencer,    September    2,    1808. 

31  Bishop,  J.  L.,  A  History  of  American  Manufactures  from  1608  to  1S60,  Vol.  11, 
pp.  129,  130.  Bishop  gives  the  most  authoritative  account  of  early  American  manu- 
factures. 

32  Ibid,    p.    130. 

33  Ibid.,    p.    131. 


174      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

shares  of  fifty  dollars  each  and  was  owned  by  over  three  hundred 
persons.  The  state  itself  owned  two  hundred  shares.  The  object 
was  to  manufacture  coarse  cotton  cloth  on  a  large  scale.^*  In 
Washington  City  a  textile  company  with  a  capitalization  of  fifty 
thousand  dollars  was  announced  as  in  process  of  formation. 
This  company  expected  to  work  up  cotton,  wool,  hemp,  and 
flax.  35 

Rhode  Island  and  other  New  England  states  likewise  felt  the 
stimulating  effect  of  the  embargo  on  manufactures.  Cotton 
manufactures  increased  rapidly.  In  1808,  in  Rhode  Island,  the 
Potowomut  Cotton  Company  was  established  at  Warwick,  a  com- 
pany at  South  Kingston,  and  another  at  Coventry.  A  Provi- 
dence item  concerning  Rhode  Island  manufactures  read : 

The  Cotton  Factories  likely  to  produce  spun  cotton  by  June  next  in  this 
state,  and  chiefly  within  a  few  miles  of  this  town  are  thirty-four  in  num- 
ber; and  they  are  expected  to  move  in  all  about  twenty  thousand  spindles. 
That  is  at  least  four  times  as  many  as  have  hitherto  been  in  operation.se 

A  cotton  mill  was  established  at  Rehoboth,  Massachusetts,  and 
still  another  at  Sterling,  Connecticut.  The  Pawtucket  mill  of 
Samuel  Slater,  however,  was  still  the  largest  in  the  Union.^^ 
Concerning  this  mill  a  Providence  letter  declared :  ' '  The  oldest 
water  spinning  factory  in  these  states  is  at  Pawtucket,  about 
five  miles  from  this  town,  it  commenced  in  1792,  with  twenty-two 
spindles  only,  it  now  moves  about  Nine  Hundred,  and  is  the 
largest  mill  in  this  country.  "^^  At  Plainfield,  New  Jersey,  the 
manufacture  of  hats  began.^^ 

A  flourishing  manufacture  of  a  different  tj^pe,  directly  result- 
ing from  the  embargo,  was  carried  on  in  northern  New  York. 
Potash  had  risen  in  value  in  Canada  from  one  hundred  to  one 
hundred  and  twenty  dollars  per  ton  to  three  hundred  dollars. 
The  temptation  afforded  by  this  high  price  gave  a  great  im- 
pulse to  potash  manufacture  in  northern  New  York-  Practical- 
ly the  entire  population  of  Essex  County  was  busied  in  making 

34  Ihid.,   p.    132. 

35  Paulson's  American  Daily  Advertiser,  July  30,   1808. 

36  Relf's  Philadelphia  Gazette  and  Daily  Advertiser,   March   11,    1808. 

37  Bishop,    op.    cit.,    p.    131. 

38  Self's  Philadelphia   Gazette    and   Daily   Advertiser,   March    11,    1808. 

39  Bishop,   J.   L.   op.  cit.  p.   132. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  175 

and  transporting  potash  to  Montreal.     This  business  continued 
until  the  outbreak  of  war  in  1812.*" 

All  manufactures,  nevertheless,  it  must  be  admitted,  did  not 
prosper.  Thus  the  Beverly  factory,  which  was  interested  in 
the  manufacture  of  bed  ticking  and  was  noted  as  the  largest 
in  the  country  even  after  the  establishment  of  some  Arkwright 
mills,  was  closed  in  1807,  "when  the  embargo  shut  up  the 
shipping  upon  which  Salem  and  Newburyport  depended  for 
prosperity,  and  a  crisis  swept  over  Essex  County  that  closed 
industrial  as  w^eU  as  mercantile  establishments."*^  Those  en- 
tirely dependent  for  a  market  on  commerce  naturally  suffered 
as  did  those  entering  entirely  into  the  process  of  ship  con- 
struction. In  1808  the  total  tonnage  of  the  vessels  built  was 
only  31,755,  or  about  one-third  that  of  the  previous  year.  Be- 
cause of  the  embargo  shipbuilding  was  given  up  on  the  Ohio; 
only  one  schooner  of  one  hundred  tons,  constructed  at  Marietta, 
was  built  during  the  year.*- 

In  1809,  1810,  and  thereafter  for  several  years  the  stimulus 
to  manufactures  increased.  Woolen  goods  were  scarce  and  high 
because  of  the  restrictions  on  trade;  hence  the  public  turned 
its  attention  to  sheep  husbandry  and  the  domestic  manufacture 
of  wool.  Messrs.  Humphreys  and  Livingston  had  imported 
some  merino  sheep  previous  to  the  embargo,  but  the  few  full 
blooded  descendants  of  those  Spanish  merino  sheep  soon  rose 
in  value  to  five  hundred  and  even  fifteen  hundred  dollars  a 
piece.  ]\Ierino  wool  rose  from  seventy-five  cents  to  two  dollars 
per  pound.  During  1809,  however,  AVilliam  Jarvis  of  Weath- 
ersfield,  Vermont,  then  sem-ing  as  American  consul  at  Lisbon, 
bought  fourteen  hundred  of  tlic  crown  flocks,  which  wei'c  sold 
at  the  order  of  the  French  government.  He  shipped  these 
sheep  to  the  United  States.  During  the  course  of  that  year 
and  the  next,  1810,  he  sent  to  the  United  States  over  two 
thousand  more  pure  merinos.  These  importations  were  en- 
couraged by  the  payment  of  bounties.  Thus  a  Pennsylvania 
law  gave  to  the  first  person  introducing  a  merino  ram  in  any 


40  Ibid.,    p.    132. 

41  Clark,    V.    S.,    History    of    Manufactures    in    the    United    States,    1607-1S60,    pp. 
534,    535. 

42  Bishop,    J.    L.,    op.    cit.,    pp.    130,    131. 


176      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

county  of  the  state  fifty  dollars.*^  Jarvis'  importations,  with 
those  of  other  parties,  in  all  about  five  thousand,  soon  re- 
duced the  price,  scattered  the  breeds  throughout  the  country, 
and  of  course  stimulated  woolen  manufacture.**  In  support 
of  this  view  we  read  such  clippings  as:  ''The  Merino  breed 
of  sheep  has  become  numerous  in  the  neighborhood  of  New- 
castle, (Del.) — ^We  observe  the  names  of  twenty-eight  gentle- 
men, who,  on  this  account,  forbid  hunting  on  their  enclosed 
grounds  with  dogs  or  guns."*'' 

Every  possible  effort  was  made  to  encourage  the  use  of  homo 
manufactures.  Militia,  judges,  and  legislators  as  well  as  execu- 
tives frequently  made  their  use  a  test  of  patriotism.  Thus  the 
Petersburg  cavalry  troop  unanimously  resolved  to  appear  clad 
in  homespun  on  the  approaching  anniversary  of  American 
independence.*^  The  members  of  the  South  Carolina  bar  agreed 
to  appear  before  the  bar  in  full  suits  of  domestic  manufac- 
tures, changed,  however  from  the  regulation  black  to  a  dark 
gray.*^  Again,  the  members  of  the  Ohio  legislature,  before 
adjourning,  passed  resolutions  upholding  the  policy  of  the  gov- 
ernment and  recommending  that  its  members  appear  at  the 
next  session  clothed  in  domestic  manufactures.*^ 

Another  stimulus  was  the  holding  of  public  dinners  or  the 
extending  of  a  vote  of  thanks,  that  is,  public  recognition.  Thus, 
at  Baltimore,  those  interested  proposed  the  holding  of  a  semi- 
annual dinner  ''to  which  every  Manufacturer,  Mechanic,  or 
Artizan  of  good  demeanor,  shall  be  invited  to  partake  of  a 
dinner,  be  his  Country,  Politics  or  Religion  what  they  may,"*^ 
Besides  enjoying  public  dinners  and  praise.  Colonel  David 
Humphreys  received  a  vote  of  thanks  from  the  Connecticut 
legislature  for  his  work  in  introducing  merino  sheep.^" 

Very  frequently   also,   premiums   were   offered   for  the  best 


43  Paulson's   American    Daily    Advertiser,    August    9,    1808. 

44  Bishop,    op.    cit.,    pp.    134,    135. 

45  National  Intelligencer,   April    19,    1809. 

46  Ibid.,   June    17,    1808. 

47  Richmond   Enquirer,    December    22,    1808. 

48  National    Intelligencer,    March    17,    1809. 

49  Baltimore  Evening  Post,  October  26,  1808. 

50  Paulson's  American  Daily  Advertiser,   November   15,    1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO.  1807-1809  177 

articles  of  domestic  manufacture.  Only  one  instance  will  be 
noted,  but  the  account  will  be  quoted  entire,  for  it  shows  the  re- 
sults as  well  as  the  inducements : 

The  Philadelphia  Premium  Society  has  awarded  to  Col.  Humphrey's 
exhibit  of  Broadcloth,  a  premium  of  50  dollars.  The  opinion  of  the  judges 
was,  'that  the  article  of  superfine  cloth  from  the  State  of  Connecticut,  ex- 
hibited for  the  premium  No.  1,  is  not  only  superior  to  any  other  specimen 
or  to  any  idea  they  had  entertained  that  cloth  of  such  quality  could  be 
manufactured  in  the  TJ.  S.  but  that  it  is  in  goodness  of  workmanship, 
whether  as  it  regards  the  spinning,  weaving,  dying  or  dressing,  at  least 
equal,  and  in  fineness  of  wool  much  superior,  to  the  best  Broadcloth  import- 
ed from  any  part  of  Europe." 

The  persons  employed  in  the  manufacture  of  the  premium  piece,  five  in 
number,  have  been  each  presented  with  an  American  half  eagle  by  the 
society.  The  Broad  cloth  manufactured  at  Humphreysville,  (Con.)  sells 
the  best  kind  for  10  dollars  per  yard,  and  the  second  quality  for  7.  Pres- 
ident Jefferson,  and  a  number  of  other  distinguished  characters,  have 
ordered  patterns  for  coats   from  this  manufactory.si 

Naturally,  friends  of  the  embargo  continually  pointed  to 
the  stimulus  of  that  measure  on  manufactures.  A  widely 
copied  article  read: 

In  Philadelphia,  the  embargo,  although  fell  severely  has  not  produced 
distress  to  the  population.  This  is  owing  in  a  great  measure  to  the  build- 
ings now  erecting  in  the  city.  The  capital  of  the  merchants  and  monied 
men  being  withdrawn  from  commerce  has  been  appropriated  to  other  pur- 
poses. Almost  four  hundred  houses  are  now  erecting  in  the  city  which 
allowing  twenty  men  to  each  house,  including  carpenters,  brickmakers. 
brick-layers,  masons,  labourers,  etc.  now  give  emplojonent  by  the  embargo 
to  8,000  of  our  citizens  who  would  otherwise  be  severely  affected  by  the  em- 
bargo. Besides,  the  banks  have  continued  their  discounts  and  have  indeed, 
so  much  money  to  lend,  that  no  man  who  has  tolerable  personal  security  to 
offer  vnW  be  refused  a  discount. ■''^ 

In  October,  1808,  the  Aurora  said : 

The  embargo  has  built,  or  nearly  built,  one  thousand  new  houses  in  this 
city.  The  embargo  has  erected  two  manufactories  of  shot  in  this  city, 
which  forever  secures  the  circulation  at  home  of  about  two  hundred  thou- 
sand dollars,  hitherto  sent  abroad  to  pay  for  shot.  For  shooting  birds 
alone  we  sent  two  hundred  thousand  dollars  abroad.  Philadelphia  now, 
from  the  two  towers  erected  for  casting  patent  shot,  can,  after  supplying 
all  America,  supply  all   Asia  besides.  .  .  We  have  two   manufactories   of 


51  Boston   Independent   Chronicle,   January   9,    1809. 

52  Baltimore    Evening   Post,    September    1,    1808. 


178      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

red  lead  already  established,  whose  capacity  is  competent  to  supply  the 
whole  country,  with  red  lead  and  with  litharge.  A  manufactory  of  white 
lead  is  also  going  on.53 

•^  Early  in  1808  the  Philadelphia  Manufacturing  Society  was 
established  with  a  capital  of  fifty  thousand  dollars  in  fifty  dol- 
lar shares.  It  expected  to  make  cotton,  woolen,  linen,  and 
other  goods.  On  November  17,  the  manufacturers  and  mech- 
anics of  Philadelphia  celebrated  the  improved  prospects  of 
industry  by  a  big  dinner.  Colonel  Humphreys  of  Connecticut 
was  present.  John  Dorsey,  president  of  the  festival,  appeared 
in  a  suit  of  American  broadcloth  made  from  merino  fleece.^* 

In  New  York  much  capital  was  diverted  from  commerce  to 
manufacturers.  Dr.  Seth  Capron,  who  had  erected  the  first 
cotton  manufactory  in  that  state  at  Whitesborough,  Oneida 
County,  established  the  Oriskany  Woolen  Mills,  thought  by 
some  people  to  be  not  only  the  oldest  in  the  state,  but  also  in 
the  United  States.  The  charter  of  the  company  was  dated 
in  1809,  but  the  mills  had  then  been  in  operation  several  months. 
Among  the  members  of  the  company  were  Stephen  Van  Rensse- 
laer, Ambrose  Spencer,  DeWitt  Clinton,  John  Taylor,  James 
Piatt,  Nathan  Williams,  Newton  Mann,  and  Theodore  Sill. 
Prices  were  high  for  several  years.  The  satinets  first  made 
sold  for  four  dollars  per  yard  and  the  broad  cloth  brought 
from  ten  to  twelve  dollars.  During  the  first  four  years  the 
wool  used  cost  one  dollar  and  twenty  cents  per  pound  on  the 
average.^^ 

The  development  of  cotton  manufactures,  due  to  commercial 
restrictions,    1803-1810,   was  wonderful.     In   1803   there   were 


53  Statesman,  November  24,   1808. 

54  Scharf,  J.  T.  and  Westcott,  Thompson,  History  of  Philadelphia,  Vol.  I,  pp.  531, 
532.  The  1808  and  1809  newspapers  of  Philadelphia  contain  numerous  advertise- 
ments of  manufactures.  A  few  of  these  are  quoted  in  Professor  L.  M.  Sears' 
"Philadelphia  and  the  Embargo  of  1808."  This  paper  was  read  in  manuscript  form 
tlirough  the  courtesy  of  Professor  Sears,  but  now  appears  in  the  Quarterly  Journal  of 
Economics,  February,  1921.  Professor  Sears,  it  appears  to  the  present  writer,  has 
practically  established  his  thesis,  "That  in  the  case  of  one  great  commercial  city 
(Philadelphia)  an  embargo  which  should  in  theory  have  proved  wholly  ruinous, 
served  in  fact,  partly  in  combination  with  growing  demands  from  the  Western 
market,  to  stimulate  manufactures  to  a  point  where  prosperity  exceeded  adversity." 
In  other  important  cities  the  development  of  manufactiires  undoubtedly  mitigated 
the  losses  arising  from  the  commercial  restrictions. 

55  Lamb,  M.  J.,  History  of  the  City  of  New  York,  Vol.  II,  Part  II,  pp.   545,  546. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  179 

only  four  cotton  mills  in  the  United  States ;  in  1810,  the  num- 
ber was  226,  a  gain  of  5550  per  cent.  These  mills  were  dis- 
tributed as  follows :  Massachusetts — 54 ;  Vermont — 1 ;  Rhode 
Island — 28;  Connecticut — 14;  New  York — 26;  New  Jersey — 4; 
Pennsylvania — 64 ;  Delaware — 3  ;  Maryland — 11 ;  Ohio — 2  ;  Ken- 
tucky— 15  ;  and  Tennessee — 4.^^ 

A  widely  copied  summarj^  of  the  beneficial  effects  of  the 
first  six  months  of  the  embargo  on  manufactures  follows: 

In  the  New  England  states,  thousands  of  respectable  manufactories  are 
in  active  operation. 

In  Philadelphia,  besides  a  respectable  public  establishment,  a  great 
number  of  private  flourishing  manufactories  of  cotton  have  been  estab- 
lished. 

In  Baltimore  a  company  with  a  million  is  organized. 

In  Petersburg  twenty-five  thousand  dollars  have  been  subscribed  in  a  day. 

In  Richmond,  under  the  most  intelligent  and  patriotic  auspices,  a  capital 
of  half  a  million  is  engaged  in  this  object. 

In  short  the  patriotic  flame  appears  to  be  fed  throughout  the  whole 
union  by  an  inexhaustible  fuel. 

Already,  it  is  computed  that  at  least  five  millions  of  dollars  have  been 
devoted  to  manufactures  in  the  last  six  months;  a  capital  competent  to 
the  furnishing  manufactured  articles  to  the  amount  of  at  least  ten  millions. 

Britain,  seeing  what  is  already  done,  will  anticipate  what  will  happen  if 
she  persist  in  her  injustice;  she  will  see  that,  five  years  hence,  we  sliall 
not  need  a  tenth  part  of  the  manufactured  goods  we  now  receive  from 
her.57 

Copious  quotations  of  the  stimulating  effect  of  the  embargo 
on  manufactures  might  be  made  from  practically  all  the  writers 
of  this  period,  but  the  author  will  content  himself  Avith  a 
brief  reference  to  three  of  the  older  \\Titers,  one  of  the  late 
investigators,  and  close  this  part  of  the  discussion  with  a  short 
reference  to  Gallatin's  report.  B.  J.  Lossing  wrote:  "The  num- 
ber of  cotton  factories  in  the  United  States  in  1810,  when  em- 
bargoes and  other  disturbers  of  commerce  with  Europe  stim- 
ulated that  industry  here,  was  241  and  the  number  of  spindles 
was  96,000."'^^  After  referring  to  the  harmful  effect  of  the 
embargo  on  commerce,  A.  S.  Bollcs  said :  ' '  Accordingly,  capital 
was  withdrawn  from  the  shipping  interest,  and  put  into  manu- 


56  Wright,  C.  D.,  Eistory  of   Wages  and  Prices  in  Massachusetts.   1752-1S83,  p.   17. 

57  Boston   Gazette,   July    7,    1808. 

58  History  of  American  Industries  and  Arts,  p.   293. 

59  Industrial   Eistory    of    the    United    States,    p.    865. 


180      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

faetures.  "^^  J.  H.  Patton,  after  referring  to  the  bad  effects 
on  commerce  and  agriculture  added:  "Some  good  grew  out 
of  this  evil.  The  tens  of  thousands  thrown  out  of  employment 
by  the  effect  of  the  embargo  and  kindred  measures  were  com- 
l)elled  by  the  iron  hand  of  necessity  to  seek  a  livelihood  by 
other  means  and  their  attention  was  somewhat  directed  to 
domestic    manufactures. ' '®° 

V.  S.  Clark,  while  not  emphasizing  the  stimulus  of  the  em- 
bargo as  much  as  some  other  writers,  nevertheless,  does  say 
that  the  embargo  and  hostilities  with  England  with  "accom- 
panying conditions  in  Europe  greatly  assisted  that  expansion." 
Of  the  embargo  itself,  Clark  declared: 

The  effect  of  the  embargo  was  two  fold;  it  curtailed  foreign  supplies 
of  textiles  and  it  caused  capital  to  be  transferred  from  commerce  to 
manufacturing.  This  was  not  a  net  gain,  for  the  business  disturbance  duo 
to  so  abrupt  and  artificial  a  readjustment  brought  loss  as  well  as  profit 
even  to  the  industries  that  were  its  ultimate  beneficiaries.  However,  a  re- 
markable multiplication  of  mills  ensued.  In  1809,  if  we  may  trust  the 
testimony  of  a  prominent  contemporary  engaged  in  this  industry,  more  than 
50  mills  were  under  construction  in  New  England.^i 

Gallatin's  Report  on  Manufactures  in  1809  divided  manu- 
factures into  three  general  classes.  In  the  first  class  he  placed 
manufactures  of  wood,  or  of  which  wood  was  the  principal 
material,  leather,  soap,  tallow  candles,  spermaceti  oil  and 
candles,  flaxseed  oil,  refined  sugar,  coarse  earthen  ware,  snuff, 
chocolate,  hair  powder,  and  mustard ;  these  were  the  articles 
of  which  the  United  States  produced  enough  to  supply  the 
home  consumption.  In  the  second  class  he  placed  manufac- 
tures "firmly  established";  iron,  cotton,  wool.  flax,  hats,  paper, 
printing  types,  printed  books,  playing  cards,  spirituous  and 
malt  liquors,  hemp,  gunpowder,  window  glass,  jewelry  and 
clocks,  lead,  straw  bonnets  and  hats,  and  wax  candles.  In  the 
third  class  he  placed  manufactures  in  which  progress  had  been 
made  as  paints  and  colors,  several  chemical  preparations  and 
medicinal  drugs,  salt,  copper,  brass,  japanned  and  plated  ware, 
calico  printing,  queens  and  other  earthen  and  glass  wares,  etc. 

It  is  not  the  intention  to  discuss  all  the  manufactures  which 


60  History   of    the    United   f^tates   of   America,   from   the   Discovery   of   the   Continent 
to   the   Close   of   the   Thirty-sixth   Congress,   p.    569. 

61  History   of  Manufactures  in  the    United  States,    1607-1860,   p.   536. 


TflE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  181 

were  said  to  be  worth  about  one  hundred  and  twenty  million 
dollars;  neither  is  it  the  intention  to  take  up  the  iron  manu- 
factures or  leather  manufactures,  both  important,  the  former 
worth  fifteen  million  dollars  and  the  latter  twenty  million.  A 
brief  reference,  however,  will  be  made  to  the  textile  and  house- 
hold manufactures.  Returns  were  received  from  eighty-seven 
mills  erected  at  the  end  of  1809.  Sixty-two  (forty-eight  water 
and  fourteen  horse)  were  in  operation  and  worked  thirty-one 
thousand  spindles.  By  far  the  largest  part  of  material  made 
from  cotton,  flax,  and  wool,  however,  was  manufactured  in 
private  families.  Carding  machines  worked  by  water  were 
established  in  the  eastern  and  middle  states  and  were  being 
introduced  elsewhere.  Jennies  and  other  spinning  machines 
as  well  as  flying  shuttles  were  also  introduced  in  many  places. 
Enough  fulling  mills  had  been  erected  to  finish  all  the  cloth 
woven  in  private  families. 

Concerning  his  sources  of  information  and  the  growth  of 
household  manufactures,  Gallatin  wrote : 

The  information  received  from  every  State,  and  from  more  than  sixty 
different  places,  concurs  in  establishing  the  fact  of  an  extraordinary  in- 
crease, during  the  two  last  years,  and  in  rendering  it  probable  that  about 
two-thirds  of  the  clothing,  including  hosiery,  and  of  the  house  and  table 
linen,  worn  and  used  by  the  inhabitants  of  the  United  States,  who  do  not 
reside  in  cities,  is  the  product  of  family  manufactures.62 

Again,  in  commenting  on  the  causes  for  general  growth  of 
manufactures,  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  wrote : 

A  great  American  capital  has  been  acquired  during  the  last  twenty 
years;  and  the  injurious  violations  of  the  neutral  commerce  of  the  United 
States,  by  forcing  industry  and  capital  into  other  channels,  have  broken 
inveterate  habits,  and  given  a  general  impulse,  to  which  must  be  ascribed 
the  great  increase  of  manufactures  during  the  two  last  years.ss 

The  decided  stimulus  given  to  manufactures  by  commercial 
restrictions  lasted  until  1815.  When  the  war  of  1812  closed, 
English  and  other  European  manufacturers  were  dumped  on 
the  American  market.  The  protective  tariff  system  was  in- 
augurated in  1816,  however;  hence  the  impetus  given  by  the 
embargo  was  never  lost  entirely. 


62  American  State  Papers,  Finance,  Vol.  II,  p.  427. 

63  Ibid.,    p.    430.      Whole    report    is   found    pp.    425-431. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

EFFECT  OF  THE  EMBARGO  ON  AGRICULTURE 

Decidedly  unlike  the  effect  on  manufactures  was  the  effect 
of  the  embargo  on  agriculture.  This  effect,  already  referred 
to  in  the  debates,  will  be  discussed  under  the  following  heads: 
price  of  produce,  value  of  real  estate,  payment  of  debts,  specula- 
tion, and  general  effect  on  the  various  sections  of  the  country. 

Congressional  debates  abound  with  references  to  unsold  crops 
and  low  prices  of  agricultural  products.  On  November  17, 
1808,  Nathaniel  Macon  of  North  Carolina,  a  friend  of  the  em- 
bargo, admitted  that  crops  remained  unsold,^  On  November 
28,  Josiah  Quincy  and  Ezekiel  Bacon  of  Massachusetts,  the  for- 
mer an  opponent  and  the  latter  a  friend  of  the  embargo, 
seemed  to  be  agreed  that  beef,  pork,  butter,  cheese,  and  other 
products  commonly  exported  sold  at  a  lower  price  than  for- 
merly, whereas  imported  products  as  tea,  sugar,  salt.  West 
India  rum,  and  molasses  sold  at  a  higher  priee.^  Two  days 
later,  George  M.  Troup  of  Georgia,  a  friend  of  the  embargo, 
contended  that  the  South  had  suffered  as  much  from  that 
measure  as  the  North.  He  declared  that  the  ordinary  market 
price  of  cotton  was  between  eighteen  and  twenty-two  cents, 
whereas  the  embargo  price  was  ten  to  twelve,  that  the  ordinary 
price  of  rice  was  from  five  to  six  dollars,  whereas  the  embargo 
price  was  two  to  three.^  A  month  later,  December  27,  James 
Sloan  of  New  Jersey,  an  opponent  of  the  embargo,  declared 
that  domestic  produce  had  fallen  one-half  in  value,  while  im- 
ported products  had  risen  in  the  same  proportion,  because  of 
the  embargo.*  Over  a  month  later,  January  31,  1809,  John 
Rhea  of  Tennessee,  a  former  friend  of  the  embargo,  now 
speaking  for  repeal   on  the   fourth  of  March,   said  that  the 


1  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.  XIX,  p.  499. 

2  Ibid.,   p.    538. 

3  Ibid.,  p.   604. 

4  Ibid.,    p.    925. 


182 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  183 

agricultural  interest  had  "to  its  great  disadvantage,  endured 
for  a  sufficient  length  of  time,  the  great  depression  in  the  price 
of  produce."^ 

Numerous  other  references  to  speeches  made  in  both  Houses 
of  Congress  might  be  given  to  show  the  general  concurrence 
of  opinion  among  friends  and  foes  of  the  embargo  that  low 
prices  were  considered  due  to  the  embargo,  though  it  ought  to 
be  pointed  out  again  that  friends  of  the  embargo  often  liked 
to  insist  that  the  low  prices  and  slow  sales  were  due  to  the 
orders  of  England  and  the  decrees  of  France  rather  than 
to  the  embargo  itself. 

American  anti-administration  newspapers  with  many  others 
from  the  first  passage  of  the  measure  referred  to  the  damaging 
effects  on  agriculture.  A  Massachusetts  paper  commented  on 
the  "alarming  and  melancholy  situation  of  the  United  States, 
and  more  especially  of  the  great  commercial  cities"  as  sufficient 
to  "appal  the  stoutest  hearts."^  A  week  later  the  same 
paper  commented  on  the  big  fall  in  the  price  of  flour  at  New 
York,  Alexandria,  Baltimore,  and  other  places,  and  stated  that 
several  great  failures  had  already  occurred.'^  Two  weeks  later 
a  writer  favored  the  establishment  of  a  national  fast  day 
because  ' '  of  tlie  present  circumstances  which  so  seriously  threat- 
en the  peace  of  our  country."® 

About  the  same  time  a  Charleston,  South  Carolina,  paper 
said : 

What  the  effect  of  this  will  be  abroad,  we  are  to  learn  hereafter,  but 
those  which  it  is  producing  at  home  we  begin  to  feel  pretty  sharply; 
rice,  which  some  weeks  since  sold  briskly  at  three  dollar  50  cents,  is  now 
nominally  but  one  dollar  75  cents.  Black  seed  cotton  has  fallen  from 
34  cents  to  22  or  23,  and  no  sale;  and  corn  down  to  56  cents.  The  North 
Carolina  Price  Current  says,  flour  is  down  to  two  dollars  25  cents  the 
barrel;  and  tobacco  to  two  dollars  50  cents  the  hundred  weight.  Such  is 
the  beginning  of  the  embargo  measure;   but  what  will  be  the  end?9 


5  Ibid.,  p.    1246. 

6  Massachusetts  Spy,  or  Worcester  Gazette,  January  6,   1808. 

7  Ibid.,  January  13,   1808. 

8  Ibid.,   January   27,    1808. 

9  Scots  Magazine;  and  Edinburgh  Literary  Miscellany,  Vol.  70,  p.  295.  This 
quotation  came  from  the  Charleston  Courier  and  was  widely  copied.  It  is  found 
in  the  Connecticut   Courant,  February   17,   1808. 


184      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

Frequently  the  attacks  took  the  form  of  poetry.  One  stanza 
from  the  long  poem,  "Americans  and  Liberty,"  follows: 

"We  all  have  families  to  feed, 
And  cover  from  the  cold. 
In  former  years   'twas  easy 
When  produce  could  be  sold, 
But  now,  what  Bonaparte  command. 
Our  chiefs  with   him   agree, 
And  all  he  wants,  our  Congress  grants; 
Such   now   is  liberty."" 

A  memorial  of  the  selectmen  of  Northampton  to  Congress 
for  the  repeal  of  the  embargo  refers  in  detail  to  the  bad  effects 
on  merchants,  sailors,  and  farmers.  Moreover,  it  shows  how  the 
injury  of  the  former  harmed  the  farmers.     Thus  we  note : 

That  bankruptcies  are  continually  occurring  in  our  great  towns,  which 
spread  their  effects  and  produce  bankrupticies  in  the  country,  which  again 
branch  out  and  extend  their  disastrous  consequences  to  tlie  door  of  almost 
every  citizen.  The  farmer  is  unable  to  find  a  market  for  his  surplus  prod- 
uce, or  to  realize  his  dues  for  such  as  he  may  heretofore  have  vended. 
His  hopes  of  an  honorable  and  needful  reward  for  the  toils  of  the  last 
season  are  defeated,  his  spirits  depressed,  and  his  laborious  industry  checked 
by  the  gloomy  prospects  of  the  future.n 

A  letter  from  Colonel  Wade  Hampton  to  General  Sumter 
describes  the  effect  of  the  embargo  in  the  South,  especially  in 
South  Carolina.  The  colonel,  who  supported  the  embargo,  said 
in  part: 

The  peculiar  stage  of  the  African  trade  had  stripped  the  planting  in- 
terest, pretty  generally,  of  their  resources,  and  involved  many  of  them  in 
debt.  The  crop  was  just  coming  in  to  their  aid,  but  being  cut  off  from 
this,  there  remains  nothing  between  the  hammer  of  the  sheriff's  auctioneer 
and  their  property — and  indeed  sales  of  this  description  have  multiplied 
to  an  astonishing  degree,  in  every  part  of  the  state. 12 

The  embargo,  since  it  lowered  agricultural  prices,  was  fre- 
quently attacked  as  a  land  tax.     Thus  we  note: 

A  Land  Tax.     The  Citizen  fairly  confesses  that  the  Embargo  is  a  land 

10  Boston   Gazette,   March   14,    1808. 

11  Ibid.,   March    18,    1808. 

12  National  Intelligencer,   April   4,    1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  185 

tax  'the  federalists  now  have  a  land  tax  in  their  favor!  And  so  it  is. 
The  farmer  who  raises  two  hundred  bushels  of  wheat  and  sells  the  same  at 
only  one  dollar  a  bushel  in  consequence  of  the  Embargo,  instead  of  Two, 
which  he  has  been  getting  for  seven  years  together,  pays  in  fact  a  tax 
out  of  his  land  of  one  hundred  dollars.  Farmers  and  men  of  property  it  is, 
but  not  of  overgrown  estates,  who  feel  the  Embargo,  and  their  feelings 
speak  out.i3 

Again,  an  article  which  declared  that  the  government  reven- 
ues, which  had  come  largely  from  commerce,  would  now  neces- 
sarily be  replaced  by  a  land  tax,  read  in  part : 

The  Farmer  who  is  nearly  ruined  by  Mr.  Jefferson's  experiments,  who 
can't  sell  his  crop  for  half  price,  and  whose  grain  is  rotting  upon  his 
hands  will  be  obliged  to  pay  a  direct  tax  to  support  government,  and  a 
set  of  blind  or  wicked  men  who  are  doing  everything  in  their  power  to 
distress  the  farmers,  are  to  be  paid  out  of  their  pockets.  The  only  way 
for  the  people  to  save  themselves  from  ruin  is  to  turn  such  unworthy  ser- 
vants out  of  office  and  elect  men  who  they  know  will  vote  against  the  em- 
bargo, and  all  such  measures  as  are  intended  to  destroy  commerce  and 
injure  agriculture  which  is  her  hand-maid.i* 

In  the  case  of  forced  sales,  prices  were  lower.  Thus,  accord- 
ing to  report,  over  one  hundred  bushels  of  wheat  in  Mont- 
gomery County,  New  York,  were  sold  at  one  shilling  nine  pence 
per  bushel.^'*  In  contrast  to  this,  if  our  authority  the  New 
York  Gazette  is  correctly  quoted,  potatoes  in  the  Fly  Market 
were,  about  the  same  time,  worth  2s  6d.  per  peck,  beef  nine 
pence  to  one  shilling  per  pound,  pigs  ten  to  twelve  shillings  a 
piece,  and  ''other  articles  proportionately  high.'"" 

Another  article  goes  to  the  opposite  extreme.  Thus  in  a 
Halifax  item  of  May  3,  concerning  New  York,  denied  by  the 
paper  quoting  it,  flour  was  reputed  to  be  worth  two  dollars 
a  barrel,  beef  and  pork  one  pence  per  pound,  tobacco  two  dol- 
lars per  hundred  weight,  cotton  and  wool  eight  cents  per 
pound.  The  yards  and  wharves  were  declared  to  be  so  full 
of  produce  that  some  lumber  brought  down  in  jMarch  had  to 
be   sold  for  firewood.^'^ 

In  general,  however,  even  the  strongest  of     administration 


13  Connecticut  Courant,  May  Jl,  1808. 

14  Baltimore  Federal  Republican   and   Commercial   Gazette,   August   22,    1808. 

15  Boston    Colii/mbian   Centinel,   June    15,    1808. 

16  Northampton    Republican   Spy,    June    15,    1808. 

17  National    Intelligencer,    August    12,    1808. 


186      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

newspapers  admitted  the  bad  effects  of  the  embargo  on  agri- 
culture. An  editorial  in  a  Virginia  paper  read  in  part:  "The 
embargo  is  certainly  an  evil — a  great  evil  upon  the  commercial 
and  agricultural  interests  of  the  nation — but  what  evil,  less 
than  it,   could  be  adopted  in  its  place  ?"^^ 

Figures  are  hard  to  obtain  for  the  exact  prices  of  various 
commodities.  Since  the  movement  in  Massachusetts,  however, 
is  in  part  typical  of  that  in  other  states,  percentage  of  decrease 
will  be  figured  from  prices  in  that  state.  The  price  of  beans 
in  1808  was  41  per  cent  less  than  in  1807,  of  potatoes  23  per 
cent  less,  of  rye  14  per  cent  less,  of  meal  16  per  cent  less, 
of  corn  about  55  per  cent  less,  of  flour  17  per  cent  less,  of  but- 
ter 17  per  cent  less,  of  cheese  5  per  cent  less,  of  veal  17  per 
cent  less,  of  beef  9  per  cent  less,  of  mutton  22  per  cent  less, 
of  pork  43  per  cent  less,  of  merchantable  boards  12  per  cent 
less,  and  of  high  grade  cord  wood  23  per  cent  less.  The  effect 
on  the  fishing  industry  was  apparently  not  so  marked.  Halibut 
declined  5  per  cent  and  eels  29  per  cent,  but  cod  fish  increased 
19  per  cent.  Naturally,  articles  produced  in  the  southern  part 
of  the  United  States  and  especially  in  foreign  countries  in- 
creased in  value  to  some  extent.  Thus  rice  increased  44  per 
cent.  Lemons  increased  168  per  cent  in  value,  cassia  140  per 
cent,  buttons  96  per  cent,  nutmegs  80  per  cent,  high  grade 
brandy  33  1-3  per  cent,  low  grade  50  per  cent,  hose  48  per 
cent,  and  shoes  15  to  33  1-3  per  cent.  The  price  of  some 
manufactured  goods,  decreased.  Gloves  fell  60  per  cent  in 
value  and  sewing  silk  16  per  cent.^^ 

Newspapers  commented  on  the  low  price  of  native  products 
and  emphasized  the  high  price  of  imported  materials.  A  New 
York  letter  referred  to  the  high  prices;  salt  at  $1.50;  Havanna 
white  and  brown  sugar  from  $10.50  and  $12.50  to  $14.50  and  $15. 
Pepper  and  cork  also  increased  in  a  marked  way,  the  latter  one 
hundred  per  cent.^^  A  Massachusetts  paper  declared  that  while 
pork  could  be  bought  for  three  cents  a  pound,  cassimeres  had 

18  Richmond    Enquirer,    December    2,    1808. 

19  Wright,  C.  D.,  History  of  Wages  and  Prices  in  Massachusetts,  pp.  70-74.  This 
study  by  Wright  is  the  most  exhaustive  of  its  kind,  but  unfortunately  it  applies  only 
to  the  one  state. 

20  Baltimore   Federal   Republican   and   Commercial   Gazette.      December   12,    1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  187 

advanced  a  dollar  a  yard,  salt  had  doubled,  and  that  almost 
all  imported  dry  goods  and  groceries  had  risen  from  ten  to  fifty 
and,  in  some  eases,  a  hundred  per  cent.^^ 

John  Howe,  the  British  agent,  reported  to  Sir  George  Pre- 
vost  on  the  low  prices.  In  a  letter  dated  June  7,  at  New 
York,  he  declared  that  before  the  <;mbargo  cotton  sold  as  high 
as  twenty-four  cents  a  pound,  but  that  a  few  days  ago  it 
would  not  bring  ten  cents  at  public  auction.^-  On  June  22,  he 
wrote  to  the  same  man  from  Philadelphia  concerning  his  ob- 
servations in  New  Jersey.  He  said  that  the  people  were 
uneasy  because  of  the  continuance  of  the  embargo,  for  the 
crop  prospects  were  excellent  but  markets  could  not  be  found.^^ 

Numerous  quotations  could  be  given  from  writers  who 
point  out  the  harmful  effect  of  the  embargo  on  products.  Only 
one  late  writer,  however,  will  be  referred  to,  D.  R.  Anderson, 
who  penned  an  interesting  biographical  sketch  of  AVilliam 
Branch  Giles,  one  of  the  administration  leaders.  In  this  study, 
Anderson  avoided  condemning  the  embargo  wholesale,  but  he 
did  point  out  some  harmful  effects.  He  said  that  the  tobacco, 
wheat,  flour,  and  corn  of  Virginia  sought  in  vain  for  a  market. 
Obviously,  if  markets  were  scarce,  prices  were  likely  to  be 
low.^*  David  Ramsay,  in  speaking  of  the  evil  effects,  declared 
that  when  the  news  of  the  embargo  reached  South  Carolina 
"the  price  of  produce  instantly  fell  more  than  one  hundred 
per  cent  or  rather  could  not  be  sold  from  want  of  pur- 
chasers. '  '^^ 

Gallatin,  Jefferson's  right  hand  man  so  far  as  the  embargo 
was  concerned,  admitted  low  prices  for  agricultural  products. 
Thus  in  his  report,  December  10,  1808,  on  the  state  of  the 
finances,  while  speaking  in  favor  of  the  loan  policy  for  raising 
money  for  war,  he  gave  tribute  to  the  embargo,  which  was 
not  all  tribute  by  saying: 

The  embargo  has  brought  into,  and  kept  in  the  United  States,  almost  all 
the  floating  property  of  the  nation.    And  whilst  the  depreciated  value  of 


21  Massachusetts  Spy.   or   Worcester   Gazette,   December   28,    1808. 

22  "Secret  Reports  of  John  Howe,"  Avierican  Historical  Review,  Vol.  XVII,   p.   90. 

23  Ibid.,   pp.    93,    94. 

24  Anderson,   D.  R.,   William  Branch  Giles,  pp.   144,   145. 

25  History  of  South  Carolina,  Vol.   II,   pp.   135,   136. 


188      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

domestic  prodvicts  increases  the  ilifRculty  of  raising  a  considerable  revenue 
by  internal  taxes,  at  no  former  time  has  there  been  so  much  specie,  so 
much  redundant  unemployed  capital,  in  the  country.  The  high  price  of 
public  stocks,  and,  indeed,  of  all  species  of  stocks,  the  reduction  of  the 
public  debt,  the  unimpaired  credit  of  the  General  Government,  and  the 
large  amount  of  existing  bank  stock  in  the  United  States  leave  no  doubt 
of  the  practicability  of  obtaining  the  necessary  loans  on  reasonable  terms. 26 

Even  Jefferson,  in  unguarded  moments,  admitted  that  the 
embargo  caused  low  prices,  and  that  the  expectation  of  its 
repeal  caused  prices  to  rise.  On  November  22,  1808,  he  wrote 
to  W.  A.  Burwell  to  deny  a  story  that  he  had  obtained  a 
high  price  for  his  tobacco  by  having  an  agent  spread  the  report 
that  the  embargo  was  going  to  be  lifted.  He  declared  that  if 
he  bought  off  every  Federalist  lie  by  the  sacrifice  of  two  or 
three  thousand  dollars,  he  would  after  a  "very  few"  purchases 
be  "as  bankrupt  in  reputation  as  in  fortune. ' '^^ 

This  story  was,  of  course,  circulated  in  the  papers.  Accord- 
ing to  the  account  a  few  weeks  before  the  meeting  of  Congress, 
a  Mr.  Coles  of  Albermarle  received  a  letter  from  his  brother, 
Jefferson's  private  secretary,  stating  that  there  was  a  prospect 
of  an  amicable  settlement  of  differences  with  England.  Mr. 
Coles  sold  his  and  the  president's  tobacco  for  seven  dollars 
per  hundred.  "The  price  is  now  four  and  a  half  dollars/'  the 
article  continued,  "Mr,  Jefferson  will  lose  nothing  by  the  em- 
bargo, whatever  other  people  may  do."  The  Norfolk  Ledger 
article  then  concluded : 

We  have  heard  the  circumstance  stated  before  we  saw  the  Richmond 
paper.  We  do  not  say  that  Mr.  Jefferson  would  countenance  any  deception 
of  this  sort;  and  Mr.  Coles  (the  secretary)  no  doubt  thought  and  believed, 
as  he  wrote;  but  Mr.  Jefferson  was  fortunate  to  sell  at  that  time.28 

Jefferson  himself,  however,  suffered  from  the  measure  he 
so  slavishly  supported.  When  he  left  the  White  House,  he 
found  it  necessary  to  raise  money  through  the  aid  of  Abraham 
Venable,  James  Madison,  and  Charles  Clay.  He  proposed  sell- 
ing two  or  three  thousand  acres  of  land,  but  probably  because 

26  Annals   of   Congress,   Vol.    XIX,    p.    1765. 

27  Writings   of   Thomas    Jefferson,   Vol.    IX,    p.    229. 

28  Federal  Gazette  and  Baltimore  Daily  Advertiser,  December  4,    1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  189 

of  the  difficulty  of  making  a  sale  at  a  fair  price,  he  asked 
for  a  year  in  which  to  dispose  of  the  land.-^ 

Of  course,  there  is  a  very  intimate  connection  between  the 
earning  power  of  property  and  its  value.  If  land  is  earning 
money,  people  are  apt  to  bid  against  each  other  for  that  land, 
and  the  price  per  acre  will  naturally  rise.  The  same  .state- 
ment will  hold  true  for  houses,  business  establishments,  slaves, 
and  other  property  which  brings  in  money.  On  the  other 
hand,  if  the  property,  whatever  it  may  be,  does  not  bring 
in  its  former  return,  the  price  is  apt  to  fall.  Farm  land  whose 
products  are  unsalable  can  not  offer  hopes  of  profitable  invest- 
ment. Since  the  price  of  the  land  itself  fell,  much  suffering 
ensued  even  with  those  people  who  kept  their  land  from  the 
hands  of  the  speculators.  Proofs  of  these  statements  perhaps 
need  not  be  given,  yet  some  examples  will  be  shown. 

On  November  25,  James  Lloyd  of  Massachusetts  declared  in 
the  Senate  that  industry  was  paralyzed,  that  the  produce  was 
rotting  on  their  hands,  and  that  real  estate  was  "nearly  un- 
saleable."^'^ On  December  3,  John  Randolph  of  Roanoke  de- 
clared in  the  House  that  produce  was  down  and  that  land 
and  slaves  had  fallen  in  value.'^  Other  instances  from  the  con- 
gressional debates  could  be  cited,  but  they  appear  superfluous. 

Newspapers,  of  course,  emphasized  the  low  value  of  propertv 
due  to  the  embargo.  In  Schoharie  county,  New  York,  horses, 
horned  cattle,  farming  utensils,  etc.  "which  in  federal  Free 
Trade  times  would  have  brought  800  dollars,  were  knocked 
off  at  only  fifty-five  dollars."^-  Again,  in  a  North  Carolina 
county,  according  to  the  Wilmington  Gazette,  at  sheriff's  sales 
one  thousand  acres  of  land  were  sold  for  twelve  dollars  an  acre, 
while  four  grown  negroes,  three  horses  and  three  beds  were 
disposed  of  for  ninety  dollars.^^ 

Another  effect  of  the  embargo,  apparent  in  some  states,  was 
the  tendency  to  concentrate  land  in  the  hands  of  the  wealthy. 
Thus  we  read: 


29  WHtings   of   Thomas  Jefferson,   Vol.   IX,   pp.   240-242. 

30  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.  XIX,  p.  135. 

31  IMd.,   p.    682. 

32  Boston    Columbian    Centinel,    June    15,    1808. 

33  Catskill   American   Eagle,   January    11,    1809. 


190      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

It  is  an  ill  wind  that  blows  nobody  good.  The  embargo  although  it 
destroys  the  poor  and  middling  folks,  will  make  our  rich  men  richer.  The 
small  estates  which  must  fall  a  sacrifice  to  it  will  be  swallowed  up  by  the 
large  ones;  and  only  two  classes  will  remain — the  great  land  holder,  and 
his  vassals.34 

Travellers  in  the  country  found  the  same  conditions  pre- 
valent. When  John  Melish  reached  Savannah  to  clear  up  the 
wreck  of  a  once  prosperous  business,  he  found  that  his  goods 
were  "  disassorted "  and  would  not  bring  half  the  original 
value  and  that  other  property  had  fallen.  "Some  landed 
property  belonged  to  the  concern,"  he  said,  "and  some  negroes 
(a  species  of  commodity  which  I  never  wished  to  deal  in)  and 
these  had  fallen  in  value. '"'^ 

E.  H.  Derby,  a  writer  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly,  said:  "Many 
a  rich  man  was  ruined,  many  a  prosperous  town  was  utterly 
prostrated  by  the  shock.  Property,  real  and  personal,  fell  from 
thirty  to  sixty  per  cent,  affecting  by  its  fall  all  classes  of 
society. '  '^^ 

H.  A.  Garland  and  other  writers  allude  to  the  difficulty 
of  transferring  agricultural  capital  to  manufactures  as  was 
done  with  the  mercantile  capital  in  the  eastern  states.  Owners 
had  to  hold  on  to  their  depreciated  and  exhausted  lands  or  be 
robbed  by  speculators.  In  pointing  out  the  contrast  between 
the  North  and  South,  Garland  said: 

The  Southern  people  being  wholly  agricultural,  could  live  a  few  years 
without  the  sale  of  their  crops;  but  the  Northern  people,  being  mainly 
dependent  on  their  labor  and  commerce,  could  not  exist  with  an  embargo 
of  long  duration.  Hence  we  find  a  patient  endurance  of  its  evils  on  the 
part  of  the  South,  while  a  spirit  of  insurrection  pervaded  the  people  of  the 
North.  In  this  restless  condition,  much  of  their  capital  and  labor  were 
permanently  directed  to  manufactures.  The  bounties  offered  by  a  total 
prohibition  of  foreign  articles,  stimulated  this  branch  of  business  in  a 
remarkable  degree;  and  when  the  embargo,  non-intercourse,  and  war  ceased 
to  operate  as  a  bounty,  they  have  had  to  be  sustained  by  heavy  duties  im- 
posed on  foreign  commerce,  at  the  expense  of  the  planting  interest  of  the 
South,  which  is  mainly  dependent  on  a  foreign  market  for  the  sale  of  its 
commodities.  Every  dollar  taken  from  commerce,  and  invested  in  manu- 
factures, was  turning  the  current  from  a  friendly  into  a  hostile  channel 
to   that   kind   of   agriculture   which   was    dependent   on   foreign   trade   for 

34  Middletown     (Conn.)    Middlesex    Gazette,    July    14,    1808. 

35  Melish,   Jolui,    Travels,   p.    261. 

36  Atlantic  Monthly,   Vol.   VII,   p.    713. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  191 

its  prosperity.  The  immediate  effect  of  the  embargo  was  to  starve  New 
England.  Its  more  permanent  consequence  has  been  to  build  it  up  at  the 
expense  of  the  planting  interest  of  the  South.  New  England  has  now  two 
sources  of  wealth,  in  her  manufactures  and  commerce;  while  the  South  have 
still  the  only  one  of  planting  tobacco  and  cotton  on  exhausted  lands,  and 
with  a  reduced  market  for  the  sale  of  her  commodities.37 

Hundreds  of  people  attracted  to  an  agricultural  life  by  the 
high  prices  paid  for  farm  products  had  bought  land  on  credit. 
They  expected  to  pay  for  this  land  by  the  sale  of  products  at 
the  usual  high  price,  but  the  embargo  interfered  with  their 
plans.  From  1793  to  1807  flour  averaged  $9.12  per  barrel 
at  Philadelphia ;  for  the  nine  years  previous  it  averaged  $5.41 
and  for  the  nine  years  following,  $5.46.^^  Much  capital  had 
been  drawn  into  wheat  farming  by  the  prevalence  of  high 
prices;  many  people  with  insufficient  capital  had  chosen  this 
occupation  in  the  hope  of  large  rewards.  Naturally,  many 
of  these  were  forced  into  bankruptcy.  Some  had  bought  land 
under  the  government  act  of  1800  which  allowed  one-fourth 
of  the  purchase  price  of  two  dollars  per  acre  to  be  paid  down 
and  the  balance  in  three  annual  installments.  During  the 
hard  times  of  1808  and  the  years  following,  many  settlers  failed 
and  others  found  that  they  could  scarcely  meet  their  obliga- 
tions.^^ 

As  early  as  March  7,  1808,  Robert  Troup,  in  a  letter  from 
Albany  to  Rufus  King,  said:  "In  the  Genesee  county  some 
farmers  have  been  compelled  to  part  with  their  wheat  1-6 
per  bushel  to  raise  money  to  pay  their  taxes;  all  the  streams 
that  flowed  into  the  treasury  of  the  Pulteney  land  office  in 
that  country  are  nearly  dried  up."*"  Nathaniel  Macon  of 
North  Carolina,  one  of  the  warmest  friends  of  the  embargo, 
confessed  the  need  for  ready  money  on  March  14,  1808,  by  pro- 
posing that  the  committee  on  public  lands  "be  instructed  to 
inquire  into  the  expediency  of  allowing  an  additional  discount 
to  purchasers  of  the  public  land  for  prompt  payment,"  and 
his   proposal   was  accepted   by  the   House.'*^ 


37  The   Life   of  John  Randolph   of  Roanoke,   p.   268. 

38  Bogart,  E.  L.,  Economic  History  of  the  United  States,  p.  123. 
3(1  Ibid.,   pp.    145,    146. 

40  Life  and  Correspondence  of  Rufus  Einff,  Vol.  V,  p.   86. 

41  House  Journal,  Tenth  Congress,  pp.  224,   225. 


192      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

Congress  realized,  as  time  passed  on,  the  position  of  those 
who  had  bought  public  land  on  credit,  and  with  little  or  no 
debate  both  Senate  and  House  passed  on  March  1,  1809,  a  bill 
granting  an  extension  of  time  of  two  years  from  date  of  last 
payment  made.  This  bill  was  approved  by  Jefferson  on 
March  2.*- 

Other  measures  also  show  the  difficult  position  of  the  country 
in  1808  and  1809.  On  March  10,  1808,  and  January  30,  1809. 
Jefferson  approved  measures  extending  terms  of  credit  on 
revenue  bonds  while  the  embargo  was  in  force.*^  Both  Houses 
of  Congress  received  petitions  for  the  staying  of  debt  collection. 
On  January  9,  1809,  Joseph  Lewis  of  Virginia  presented  in 
the  House  a  petition  of  Marshing  Waring  and  other  inhabitants 
of  the  District  of  Columbia  asking  ''that  all  executions  which 
have  been  or  may  be  awarded  against  the  petitioners  and  other 
inhabitants  of  the  said  District,  may  be  stayed  during  the 
continuance  of  the  embargo  and  non-intercourse  laws  of  the 
United  States,"  or  if  unallowable,  that  some  other  relief  be 
granted.** 

John  Melish,  in  describing  his  business  failure  in  Savannah, 
declared  that  the  outstanding  debts,  if  collected  at  all,  "could 
only  be  done  at  a  labour,  expense  and  loss  of  time  that  would 
probably  be  greater  than  the  ultimate  value  of  them."  The 
courts  of  law,  he  declared,  were  suspended;  hence,  recovery 
by  that  means  was  slow  and  tedious  as  well  as  uncertain.  He 
had  185  debtors  scattered  over  a  space  of  nearly  two  hundred 
square  miles.*^ 

On  November  16,  Josiah  Quincy  recorded  in  his  Dairy  a  con- 
versation with  John  Randolph  of  Roanoke.  The  latter  told 
him  that  the  embargo  was  ruining  Virginia,  especially  his 
county  of  Charlotte,  where  the  justices  kept  open  court  and 
business  progressed  as  usual.  In  other  parts  of  the  state, 
Randolph  said,  and  he  cited  especially  Albermarle  County  and 
Jefferson's  neighborhood,  the  justices  did  not  transact  busi- 
ness.    Such  a  course  naturally  checked,  somewhat,  the  imme- 


42  Annals   of   Congress,    Vol.    XIX,    pp.    453,    1230,    1241,    1432,    1433,    1546,    1831 
and   1832. 

43  Ibid.,   Vol.    XVIII,   pp.    2837-2839;    Vol.   XIX,   pp.    1807,    1808. 

44  House   Journal,   Tenth   Congress,   p.    456. 

45  Melish,  John,  Travels,  p.   261. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  193 

diate  pressure  of  the  embargo  and  gave  it  some  popularity 
with  those  who  wanted  an  excuse  for  failure  to  pay  debts. 
Randolph  insisted  that  the  people  had  been  deluded  by  the 
embargo  and  that  their  support  of  the  measure  was  due  solely 
to  patriotism  and  a  "belief  that  it  had  its  origin  in  the  real 
good  of  the  country."*^ 

Southern  states  met  with  great  difficulty  in  enforcing  the 
payment  of  debts.  Virginia  early  suspended  the  levy  of  exe- 
cutions for  a  year,  an  act  referred  to  by  a  Norfolk  paper  as 
''one  of  the  glorious  effects  of  the  Embargo."*^  The  people 
of  North  Carolina  also  early  felt  the  effects  of  the  embargo, 
and  by  common  consent  agreed  to  stop  law.  They  would  not 
allow  any  writ  of  execution  le\aed  or  any  goods  sold  at  auction 
in  pursuance  of  such  writ.*^  A  few  months  later  a  petition 
signed  by  272  citizens  of  Grenville  county  was  presented  to 
the  governor.  The  petition  asked  that  the  legislature  might 
be  "convened  for  the  purpose  of  making  some  provisions 
against  the  distresses  arising  from  the  embargo."*^ 

Constant  complaints  evidently  forced  the  legislature  to  act, 
for  a  New  England  paper  declared:  ''The  embargo  tells. — A 
bill  has  been  passed  by  the  Legislature  of  North  Carolina  to 
suspend  executions  on  contracts  till  the  31st  of  Dec.  1809."^° 
Agitation  was  strong  in  South  Carolina,  but  the  legislature 
early  refused  to  interfere  between  debtors  and  creditors.  Even 
at  that,  however,  debts  could  with  difficulty  be  collected.^^ 
Georgia  passed  a  law  to  suspend  the  sale  of  property  taken  in 
execution,  but  only  until  September  when  it  was  thought  that 
the  embargo  would  be  raised.^^  The  Georgia  law  was  specifi- 
cally admitted  by  an  administration  newspaper  as  being  in- 
tended to  alleviate  the  condition  of  debtors.^^ 

Very   early   we   have    this   summary   statement:    "In    some 


46  Life  of  Josiah  Quincy  of  Mass.,  by  his  son  Edmund  Quincy,  pp.   143,   144. 

47  Boston    Columbian   Centinel,   February   24,    1808. 

48  Oonnecticut    Courant,    March    16,    1808. 

49  Relf'a   Philadelphia    Gazette,    and    Daily    Advertiser,    July    12,    1808. 
-  50  Oonnecticut  Courant,  January  11,   1809. 

51  National  Intelligencer,  July   25,   1808. 

52  Connecticut   Courant,   May   11,    1808. 

53  Richmond  Enquirer,  June   17,    1808. 


194      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

states  so  deep  and  general  is  the  ruin  that  the  ordinary  course 
of  justice  is  suspended.  .  ."^* 

The  Legislature  of  this  State,"  says  a  Baltimore  paper,  "have  passed 
the  Law  for  Staying  Executions.  This  is  another  proof  of  the  efficacy  of 
the  Terrapin  System.  .  .  When  (says  Mr.  Randolph)  I  hear  that  the  Court 
of  King's  Bench  has  been  obliged  to  stay  proceedings  I  shall  believe  that 
England  may  suffer  as  much  in  consequence  of  your  embargo,  as  the 
people  of  this  country  now  do.JJS 

Sometimes  efforts  were  made  to  relieve  the  condition  of  the 
farmers  by  lending  them  money  on  the  security  of  real  estate. 
Thus  the  New  York  legislature  authorized  a  loan  of  $450,000 
in  amounts  not  exceeding  five  hundred  dollars.  The  loan 
applied  to  every  county  in  the  state  and  was  to  be  secured  by 
real  estate.^^  Creditors  sometimes  preferred  produce,  though 
declining  in  price,  to  the  postponement  of  settlement.  The 
following  entry  is  taken  from  an  administration  newspaper: 
The  Embargo  is  No  Excuse 

The  subscriber  takes  this  method  to  inform  those  who  are  indebted  to 
him,  that  he  will  receive  Wheat,  Corn,  or  Oats,  in  payment  till  the  tenth  of 
February  next,  when  cash  will  be  expected. — The  embargo  has  not  prevented 
the  growth  of  produce — nor  can  it  longer  be  a  plea  to  procrastinate  pay- 
ments  in   grain.     January   28,    1809.     J.    Monroe.^'' 

In  New  York,  where  executions  were  not  stayed,  the  number 
of  commitments  to  prison  for  debt  increased.  Thus  a  Troy 
item,  dated  January  17,  reads: 

Embargo  Effects.  It  is  a  melancholy  fact  that  there  have  been  291 
commitments  to  the  jail  in  this  county  for  debt,  since  the  5th  of  March 
last:  and  (we  are  told  by  a  person  upon  the  limits)  from  70  to  100  now 
remain  confined,  and  within  the  yard.  Previous  to  the  passage  of  the 
destructive  embargo,  it  was  rare  that  the  number  of  imprisoned  debtors 
exceeded  ten.  Numbers  are  added  almost  daily  to  the  above,  and  there 
is  no  knowing  where  it  will  end.     In  this  way  the  Embargo  Tells.^^ 

Under  the  title,  "More  Embargo  Effects,"  another  item 
adds: 

The  Humane  Society  of  New  York  report,  that,  from  the  31st  Dec.  180S, 


54  Boston    Gazette,   May   26,    1808. 

55  Federal  Republican  and  Commercial  Gazette,  December  16,   1808. 

56  Boston   Gazette,  April  21,   1808. 

57  Danville    (Vt.)    North  Star,   January   28,    1809. 

58  New   England  Palladium,  January   27,    1809. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  195 

there  have  been  imprisoned  in  the  goal  of  the  city,  on  Justices  Executions 
only,  1317  persons!  591  of  whom  were  females!  and  726  males.  In  1807, 
the  number  of  prisoners  upon  the  Society's  list  was  298;  they  have  in- 
creased the  last  year  to  1025.  It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  970  of  the 
above  mentioned  prisoners  were  confined  for  sums  less  than  10  dollars.''^ 

Such  reports,  stay  laws,  obstruction  of  justice,  and  exag- 
gerated accounts  of  suffering  were,  no  doubt,  responsible  for 
statements  made  in  English  papers.  One  of  the  monthly 
magazines  declared  in  March,  1809 : 

We  understand  that  the  Government  of  the  United  States  has  enacted 
that  no  execution  for  debt  shall  be  levied  upon  any  one  (Even  though  upon 
an  actual  judgment)  before  the  1st  of  January,  1810.  The  necessity  for 
this  measure  has  been  occasioned  by  the  pecuniary  embarrassments  con- 
sequent upon  the  Embargo.^o 

Naturally  enough,  when  people  are  in  debt  and  in  need  of 
ready  money,  speculators  find  profitable  business.  Men  of 
ability  and  shrewdness  with  ready  cash  or  fair  credit  bought 
mortgaged  land  cheap  and  products  that  could  be  kept  for  a 
while  "at  a  song". 

On  December  3,  John  Randolph  of  Roanoke  insisted  that 
Shylock  with  a  single  dollar  now  made  as  great  a  profit  out 
of  the  suffering  planter  by  purchasing  as  much  actual  property 
as  before  he  could  buy  with  two  dollars.  For  this  reason,  so 
Randolph  declared,  dealers  in  mortgages  and  "five  per  cent 
per  month  men"  were  warm  friends  of  the  embargo.^^  On 
December  27,  James  Sloan  of  New  Jersey  declared  that  the 
passage  of  resolutions  reported  by  the  committee  on  foreign 
relations  looking  towards  a  more  stringent  embargo  law  had, 
in  a  few  days,  "transferred  an  immense  sum  of  money  from 
the  industrious  yeomanry  of  the  country  to  idle  speculators  and 
stock  jobbers  of  both  town  and  country."''-  On  February  2, 
Benjamin  Tallmadge  of  Connecticut  insisted  that  the  prices 
of  export  articles  would  rise  from  ten  to  fifty  per  cent  under 
a  belief  that  the  embargo  was  going  to  be  raised.  Postpone- 
ment of  the  repeal,  he  argued,  would  prolong  speculation  which 
ought   to   be   ended    as   speedily    as    possible.®^     About   three 


59  Ibid.,   March   3,    1809. 

60  Gentleman's   Magazines   and   Ilistorical    Chronicle.   Vol.    79,    p.    270. 

61  Annals   of   Congress,   Vol.   XIX,   pp.    682,    683. 

62  Ihid.,    p.    925. 

63  Ihid.,    p.    1305. 


196      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

weeks  later,  February  20,  in  a  speech  already  cited  elsewhere, 
Randolph  spoke  against  the  encouragement  of  gambling 
through  vacillation  in  the  embargo  policy.^* 

Only  two  other  instances  of  speculation,  both  from  friends  of 
the  embargo,  will  be  mentioned.  The  reader  will  readily  recall 
the  trouble  occasioned  Jefferson  by  the  free  way  in  which 
Governor  Sullivan  of  Massachusetts,  issued  permits  to  import 
provisions.  In  a  letter  to  Lieutenant-Governor  Levi  Lincoln, 
November  13,  1808,  previously  quoted,  Jefferson  stated  that 
Sullivan's  permits  were  openly  bought  and  sold  in  Washington, 
Alexandria,  and  elsewhere.*^^  The  buyers,  of  course,  were 
speculating  in  farm  products.  On  December  28,  Gallatin  wrote 
Jefferson  a  letter,  also  previously  quoted,  stating  that  all  the 
cotton  in  New  York  had  "been  purchased  by  speculators  in 
Boston.  "^^  Since  friends  and  foes  of  the  embargo  policy  alike 
admitted  speculation  in  various  articles,  further  comment  seems 
^superfluous. 

Representatives  of  the  various  states  seemed  to  consider  it  a 
point  of  honor  to  claim  that  their  state  suffered  more  than 
other  states.  Even  friends  of  the  embargo,  as  already  in- 
dicated, pointed  out  in  pride  that  their  states  also  suffered  very 
severely  but  that  they  were  more  patriotic  than  the  others. 
Opponents  of  the  embargo  answered  that  southerners  as  well 
as  northerners  watched  every  opportunity  of  violating  the 
embargo  laws,  that  their  patriotism  was  of  the  lip  and  not  in 
deed.  David  Ramsay's  words  are  fairly  typical  of  the  attitude, 
and  though  they  do  not  bear  on  agriculture  alone,  will  be 
quoted  at  this  time: 

The  price  of  produce  instantly  fell  more  than  one  hundred  per  cent,  or 
rather  could  not  be  sold  from  want  of  purchasers.  The  labors  of  the 
past  year  were  rendered  unavailing  to  the  relief  of  their  owner  though 
pressed  with  debt  and  threatened  with  executions.  Factors,  wharfingers,  and 
others  engaged  in  the  transportation  or  sale  of  commodities,  suddenly  passed 
over  from  the  full  tide  of  emplo^-ment  to  listless  inactivity.  A  general 
stagnation  of  business  in  the  midst  of  that  bustling  period  which  is  called 
the  crop  season  instantly  took  place.     The  distresses  of  individuals  were 


64  lUd.,   p.    1475. 

65  Writings  of  Thomas  Jefferson,   Vol.   IX,   p.   227. 

66  Writings    of    Albert    Gallatin,    Vol.    I,    p.    448. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  197 

both  the  causes  and  effects  of  the  distresses  of  others.  A  chain  of  suffering 
encircled  the  community.  All  this  was  magnanimously  borne  by  a  great 
majority  of  the  inhabitants.  Their  reproaches  fell  not  on  the  administrators 
or  their  own  government  but  on  the  authors  of  British  orders  and  French 
decrees.  The  Legislature  of  the  State  applauded  the  measures  of  the  gen- 
eral government  and  their  applause  was  re-echoed  by  the  people.  The 
discontent  of  a  few  evaporated  in  private  murmurings,  and  did  not  produce 
a  single  public  expression  of  disapprobation  or  impatience.  While  others 
contended  that  they  suffered  most  from  the  embargo,  the  Carolinians  with 
justice  preferred  their  claim  to  the  honor  of  bearing  it  best.  History  is 
confined  to  the  relation  of  facts,  and  does  not  extend  to  conjectures  on 
contingent  events,  or  it  might  be  added  that  if  the  embargo  had  been 
as  faithfully  observed  and  as  patiently  borne  in  every  part  of  the  Union 
as  it  was  in  Carolina,  the  issue  would  probably  have  been  very  different, 
and  certainly  more  to  the  honor  of  the  United  States.67 

Just  at  this  time  it  may  be  worth  while  to  consider  briefly 
the  effects  of  the  embargo  on  the  different  sections.  The 
strongest  opposition  to  the  embargo,  as  already  indicated,  came 
from  the  New  England  States.  In  the  northern  states  the 
bankruptcy  laws  were  generally  enforced;  in  the  southern 
states  they  were  not.  The  pressure  accordingly  seemed  to  be 
greater  in  the  North.  The  New  England  carrying  trade,  as 
was  mentioned  in  an  earlier  chapter,  was  practically  destroyed, 
but  a  large  part  of  this  trade  was  carried  for  other  sections 
of  the  country.  In  fact,  so  far  as  the  effect  on  agriculture 
was  concerned,  New  England  probably  suffered  less  than  any 
other  section,  for  she  consumed  most  of  her  products.  More- 
over, abundant  water  power  and  the  natural  skill  of  the  Yankee 
workman  led  to  the  rapid  development  of  manufactures.  This 
development  enabled  New  England  to  supply  other  sections  of 
the  country  with  manufactured  goods. 

In  considering  the  effect  of  the  embargo  on  the  farmer, 
we  should,  of  course,  consider  the  nature  of  his  products.  If 
they  were  perishable,  the  loss  would  be  great ;  if  they  would 
keep  indefinitely,  his  loss  would  be  much  smaller.  Neverthe- 
less, as  previously  indicated,  practically  all  farmers  suffered 
from  low  prices  due  to  a  glutting  of  the  home  markets  and 
inability  to  reach  the  foreign  markets.  Heavy  loss  fell  on  the 
farmers  of  the  Middle  States.  Their  live  stock  depreciated  in 
value  though,  of  course,  it  did  not  have  to  be  killed  at  once 


67  Ramsay,   David,   History   of  South   Carolina,   Vol.   II,   pp.    135,    136. 


198      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

and  grain  could  be  fed  to  it.  Wheat  fell  from  two  dollars  a 
bushel  to  seventy-five  cents,  and  was  well-nigh  unsalable  at 
that.  Shut  off  from  a  market  for  articles  of  export  when  im- 
ported articles  were  rising  in  value,  the  farmers  of  the  Middle 
States  were  well-nigh  forced  to  live  off  of  the  products  of 
their  own  farms.  Such  a  condition,  however,  was  not  nearly 
so  difficult  then  as  it  would  be  now.  Moreover,  throughout 
the  Middle  States,  as  well  as  in  New  England,  were  small 
cities  which  furnished  local  markets  of  some  worth.  Again, 
as  in  New  England,  the  stimulus  given  to  manufactures  offset 
in  small  part  the  disadvantages  of  the  embargo.  New  York, 
Philadelphia,  and  Baltimore,  as  well  as  numerous  other  places, 
diverted  capital  from  commerce  to  manufactures. 

In  all  probability  the  embargo  exerted  its  greatest  pressure 
on  the  southern  states,  though  many  of  the  best  authorities 
on  the  subject  think  otherwise.  For  instance,  James  Schouler, 
who  says  that  the  embargo  may  be  compared  to  the  ampu- 
tation of  a  "limb  in  order  to  save  life,"  declares  that  the 
lumber,  tobacco,  and  rice  owners  did  not  suffer  so  much  as 
those  with  more  perishable  products,  and  that  an  embargo  of 
short  duration  would  not  show  partiality.®^  Again  Profes- 
sor II.  von  Hoist  describes  New  England  as  industrially  ruin- 
ed: 

"It  was  quite  as  easy  to  discover  the  proportion  in  which  the  different 
interests  had  to  suffer.  The  planters'  staple  articles  principally  tobacco 
and  cotton,  remained  unsold,  but  the  planters  themselves  suffered  relatively 

but  little  damage.  They  were  sure  of  finding  a  market  again  as  soon  as 
the  harbors  were  open.  The  farmers  sold  a  considerable  portion  of  their 
products  in  the  country  itself;  the  rest  were  for  the  most  part  a  total  loss. 
The  productive  industry  of  the  New  England  fishermen,  shipbuilders,  ship 
owners,  importers  and  exporters  and  all  who  depended  on  them,   ceased 

almost  entirely.69 

It  was  true,  of  course,  that  tobacco,  cotton,  rice,  and  many 
other  important  southern  products  were  not  immediately  perish- 
able. Their  market,  however,  was  greatly  limited.  Tobacco, 
to  be  sure,  could  be  consumed  at  home,  and  it  was  to  a 
large  extent  but  at  very  low  prices.     Much  of  the  cotton  was 

68  History  of  the  United  States  under  the  Constitution,  Vol.  II,  pp.  180-183. 

69  Constitutional  and  Political  History  of  the   United  States,  Vol.   I,   p.   209. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBAEGO,  1807-1809  199 

likewise  sold  at  home  at  the  low  embargo  price,  and  thus 
helped  stimulate  northern  manufactures.  Rice,  however,  was 
not  a  particularly  popular  article  of  diet  in  the  North.  The 
people  of  the  New  England  States  preferred  the  wheat  of 
the  Middle  States  to  the  rice  of  the  Carolinas  or  Georgia. 
Moreover,  because  of  nearness,  the  surplus  wheat  and  flour  of 
New  York,  Pennsylvania,  and  New  Jersey  were  given  some 
preference  over  the  wheat  of  ^Maryland,  Virginia  and  states 
still  further  south.  Again,  it  must  be  kept  in  mind  that  the 
farms  of  the  South  were  much  larger  than  those  of  the  New 
England  and  Middle  States,  and  not  usually  self-sufficing. 
Big  plantations,  because  of  slave  labor  stuck  closely  to  such 
staple  products  as  tobacco,  cotton,  and  rice.  With  the  pro- 
ceeds of  the  year's  crops  planters  paid  debts  of  years'  stand- 
ing and  bought  the  necessities  for  the  next  year.  Obviously, 
anything  interfering  with  this  practice  wrought  hardships 
on  the  planters.  Moreover,  southern  society  was  less  flexible 
than  northern  society.  In  New  England  and  the  Middle  States 
the  people  had  a  fairly  good  idea  of  economy  and  how  to  prac- 
tice it.  This  was  hardly  true  in  the  South.  Many  people 
there  had  never  heard  of  the  word;  few  knew  how  to  practice 
it.  They  went  on  buying,  going  deeper  and  deeper  into  debt, 
with  thought  of  the  morrow  perhaps,  yet  without  knowledge 
of  a  way  to  meet  the  situation.  State  legislatures  recognized 
the  difficulty;  hence  we  have  the  stay  laws.  Now  at  the  same 
time  that  products  for  exports  were  going  do\vn,  imported  articles 
were  rising  in  price  and  the  planters  were  buying  as  of  yore. 
Koreover,  the  value  of  the  land,  never  so  great  as  in  the 
North,  was  depreciating  rapidly.  Again,  slaves,  the  peculiar 
property  of  the  South,  were  likewise  going  dovra  in  value. 

New  England  commercial  capital  was  fluid  and  could  be 
easily  diverted  to  manufactures.  Southern  capital,  tied  up 
in  land  and  slaves  could,  with  difficulty,  be  diverted  to  manu- 
factures, though  efforts  were  made  in  that  direction  and  do- 
mestic manufactures  received  a  considerable  impetus.  Again, 
it  must  be  born  in  mind  that  the  South  was  not  so  favored 
by  water  power,  climate,  and  fuel  for  manufactures  as  the 
North.  Moreover,  the  southerner  himself  lacked  the  versatili- 
ty   and    progressiveness    of    his    northern   brother,    while    his 


200      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

slaves  were  not  considered  capable  of  diversified  farming,  let 
alone  manufacturing.  Furthermore,  while  these  same  slaves 
were  largely  fed  with  southern  food  stuffs,  they  were  not  en- 
tirely clothed  with  southern  manufactures.  Deprived  of  Eng 
lish  manufactures  to  some  extent,  the  South  helped  encourage 
northern  manufactures  by  supplying  cheap  cotton  and  buying 
the  manufactured  product.  It  is  not  necessary,  however,  to 
go  all  the  way  with  Henry  Adams  who  emphasized  the  evil 
effects  too  much.     He  wrote: 

The  true  burden  of  the  embargo  fell  on  the  Southern  States,  but  most 
severely  upon  the  great  State  of  Virginia.  Slowly  decaying,  but  still  half 
patriarchal,  "Virginia  society  could  neither  economize  nor  liquidate.  To- 
bacco was  worthless;  but  four  hundred  thousand  negro  slaves  must  be 
clothed  and  fed,  great  establishments  must  be  kept  up,  the  social  scale  of 
living  could  not  be  reduced,  and  even  bankruptcy  could  not  clear  a  large 
landed  estate  without  creating  new  encumbrances  in  a  country  where  land 
and  negroes  were  the  only  forms  of  property  on  which  money  could  be 
raised.  Stay  laws  were  tried,  but  served  only  to  prolong  the  agony.  With 
astonishing  rapidity  Virginia  succumbed  to  ruin,  while  continuing  to  sup- 
port the  system  that  was  draining  her  strength.  No  episode  in  American 
history  was  more  touching  than  the  generous  devotion  with  which  Virginia 
clung  to  the  embargo,  and  drained  the  poison  which  her  own  President  held 
obstinately  to  her  lips.  The  cotton  and  rice  States  had  less  to  lose,  and 
could  more  easily  bear  bankruptcy;  ruin  was  to  them — except  in  Charleston 
— a  word  of  little  meaning;  but  the  old  society  of  Virginia  could  never  be 
restored.  Amid  the  harsh  warnings  of  John  Randolph  it  saw  its  agonies 
approach;  and  its  last  representative,  heir  to  all  its  honors  and  dignities, 
President  Jefferson  himself,  woke  from  his  long  dream  of  power  only  to 
find  his  own  fortunes  buried  in  the  ruin  he  had  made.^o 

At  the  opposite  extreme  stands  Professor  Edward  Channing, 
who  underestimated  the  evil  effects  of  the  embargo.  He  con- 
tended that  the  evil  effects  of  that  measure  were  grossly  over- 
stated. One  quotation  will  be  given  to  show  the  difference 
of  opinion  between  him  and  Adams.     Said  Channing: 

The  conditions  of  Virginia  life  forbade  any  such  supposition  as  that 
which  even  so  calm  a  writer  as  Mr.  Adams  permitted  himself  to  make. 
Tobacco  was  not  a  perishable  commodity  like  peaches  or  pears;  it  could 
be  kept,  when  properly  cured  for  several  years.  The  domestic  tobacco  mar- 
ket remained  open  during  this  time.  The  great  Virginia  plantations  were 
practically  self-sustaining,  so  far  as  the  actual  necessaries  of  life  were 
concerned;    the   slaves  had   to   be   clothed    and   fed   whether   tobacco   and 


70  History  of  the   United  States,  Vol.  IV,   pp.   281,  282. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  201 

wheat  could  he  sold  or  not,  but  they  produced,  with  the  exception  of 
the  raw  material  for  making  their  garments,  practically  all  that  was  es- 
sential to  their  well-being.  The  money  which  the  Virginia  planters  received 
for  their  staple  products  was  used  to  purchase  articles  of  luxury — wine 
for  the  men,  articles  of  apparel  for  the  women,  furnishings  for  the  house, 
and  things  of  that  kind,  and  to  pay  the  interest  on  the  load  of  indebted- 
ness which  the  Virginia  aristocracy  owed  at  home  and  abroad.  It  is 
doubtless  true,  although  not  susceptible  of  absolute  proof,  that  Virginia 
society  was  already  honey-combed  with  extravagance  and  debt.  Its  ruin 
was  already  begun;  the  embargo,  so  far  as  it  operated  to  instil  ideas  of 
economy  into  the  heads  of  those  whom  Josiah  Quincy  termed  the  'lordlings 
of  Virginia'  was  a  positive  benefit.^i 

Many  people  think  that  the  noise  made,  the  complaints 
uttered,  and  the  number  of  law  violations  measure  the  in- 
juries inflicted  by  an  oppressive  law.  Judged  by  that  stand- 
ard, New  England  and  New  York  suffered  most  from  the 
embargo.  That  standard,  however,  is  crooked.  New  England 
was  the  stronghold  of  the  Federalists,  the  opposition  party, 
and  that  fact  alone  explains  a  whole  lot.  From  the  dawn 
of  history,  and  if  we  may  judge  by  human  nature,  to  the 
niillenium,  the  opposition  party  has  condemned  and  will 
condemn  the  party  in  power  wherever  possible,  if  for  no  other 
reason  than  a  desire  to  regain  office.  A  large  part  of  the 
opposition  to  the  embargo  in  the  North  was  thus  political; 
on  the  other  hand,  the  main  reason  for  its  support  in  the 
South  was  political.  Jefferson  and  most  of  the  friends  of  the 
embargo  came  from  the  South.  Again,  it  should  be  borne  in 
mind  that,  as  time  passed,  the  opinion  developed  in  all  parts 
of  the  country  that  the  embargo  was  directed  against  England 
primarily.  Since  the  Federalists  sympathized  with  England, 
they  found  an  added,  though  an  unpatriotic  reason,  for  op- 
posing the  embargo.  They  wished  to  be  on  good  terms  with 
Great  Britain,  for  that  .country,  by  her  control  of  the  sea, 
could  regulate  commerce,  and,  if  she  desired,  could  inflict 
far  greater  injuries  on  the  American  carrying  trade  than 
could  France.  Befriended  by  England,  that  carrying  trade 
would  be  immensely  profitable.  In  the  South  the  carrying 
trade  was  too  small  to  occasion  much  worry.  The  trouble 
there  was  largely  the  low  price  of  real  estate,  slaves,  and  farm 


71  Jeffersonian   System,   pp.   217,   218. 


202      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

products.  England  was  regarded  as  the  enemy,  France  was 
more  of  a  friend,  for  Jefferson  and  others  who  had  been  in 
France  still  remembered  French  associations  and  the  help 
given  by  that  country  during  the  Eevolutionary  War. 
Again,  the  ravages  of  the  British  army  in  the  South  had  been 
greater  than  in  the  New  England  States;  hence  the  hatred  of 
England  was  deep  seated.  Thus,  believing  that  the  embargo 
was  directed  against  Great  Britain,  the  South  supported  it 
for  the  very  reason  that  New  England  opposed  it.  Moreover, 
the  very  character  of  southern  society,  aristocratic  and  hence 
undemocratic,  blinded  the  southerners  to  the  dangers  from 
Napoleon  and  his  empire.  The  democratic  town  meetings,  hot- 
beds of  discussion,  were  not  found  in  the  South  as  in  New 
England. 

Largely  for  political  reasons  then,  the  South  bore  the 
pressure  of  the  embargo  with  more  patience  than  the  North,  but 
the  suffering  was  perhaps  greater,  though  the  noise  was  less.  In 
the  North,  smuggling  and  riots  were  common;  in  the  South 
riots  were  uncommon,  but  smuggling  was  carried  on,  though 
to  a  lesser  extent  than  in  the  North,  for  the  opportunities 
of  law  violation  were  smaller.  For  that  very  reason  then,  the 
suffering  was  perhaps  greater.  David  Ramsay,  while  pointing 
out  the  extreme  hardships  occasioned  by  the  embargo,  insist- 
ed that  if  the  other  states  had  observed  the  measure  as  cheer- 
fully and  faithfully  as  South  Carolina,  ''the  issue  would  prob- 
ably have  been  very  different,  and  certainly  more  to  the  honor 
of  the  United  States.  "^^  The  reader  then,  because  complaints 
were  few  at  first,  should  not  think  that  the  embargo  pressed 
lightly  on  the  South.  Political  ties,  hatred  of  England,  and 
the  very  character  of  southern  society  led  to  the  support  o£ 
the  embargo  even  when  the  weight  of  that  measure  was  falling 
with  crushing  force  on  most  classes  of  the  population. 

In  concluding  the  discussion  of  the  effect  on  agriculture,  it 
seems  almost  superfluous  to  point  out  in  summary  that  unlike 
the  case  with  manufactures,  the  embargo  injured  agriculture 
and  the  farmers  as  a  whole.^^    Prices  of  agricultural  products 

72  History  of  South  Carolina,  Vol.  II,  p.  136. 

73  It  is  possible,  of  course,  to  give  exceptions  as  in  the  case  of  the  hemp  growers 
in  the  West.     Even  there,   however,   the   price   of  hemp  was  low.     In   1810  in   tho 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  203 

went  down,  imported  articles  went  up,  land  and  slaves  de- 
preciated in  value,  mortgages  were  foreclosed  or  stay  laws 
were  forced  through,  speculators  thrived  by  buying  up  pro- 
ducts from  farmers  at  low  prices,  and  money  lenders  obtained 
exorbitant  interest.  In  short,  many  a  large  estate  was  lost  in 
whole  or  in  part,  many  an  aristocratic  planter  went  to  the 
wall,  and  many  a  poor  farmer  with  his  wife  and  children 
suffered  for  the  actual  necessities  of  life  in  the  way  of 
clothing,  if  not  of  food.  With  his  products  well  nigh  unsalable 
and  his  credit  poor,  the  farmer  certainly  had  "a  hard  row 
to  hoe." 


state  of  Kentucky  11,510,000  pounds  of  hemp  were  valued  at  $690,600  and  the 
3,987,000  pounds  of  cordage  at  $398,400.  People,  because  of  low  prices  and  the 
difficulty  of  transportation,  soon  turned  their  attention  to  the  culture  of  tobacco 
(Pitkin,  Timothy,  Statistical  View,  p.   235). 


CHAPTER  IX 

EFFECT  OF  THE  EMBARGO  ON  COMMERCE 

The  effect  of  the  embargo  on  the  carrying  trade  was  at 
once  apparent.  In  considering  figures  it  must  be  borne  in 
mind  that  the  customs  year  ended  September  30;  hence  no 
one  year  shows  the  full  effect  of  the  embargo,  for  that  meas- 
ure was  enacted  in  December  of  1807  and  repealed  in  March 
of  1809.  The  comparisons  of  1807  and  1808,  however,  partial- 
ly  show  the  difference;   hence   they   will   be   used   here.      In 

1807  the  sugar  exported  amounted  to  143,136,905  pounds;  in 

1808  to  28,974,927.  The  figures  for  coffee  stood  at  42,122,573 
pounds  and  7,325,448 ;  for  pepper,  4,207,166  pounds  and  1,709,- 
978 ;  and  for  cocoa,  8,540,524  pounds  and  1,896,990.  Exporta- 
tion of  other  products  was  down  in  about  the  same  propor- 
tion. The  total  value  of  exports  in  1807  was  $108,343,150  and 
in  1808,  $22,430,960.1  The  duties  on  goods  principally  ad 
valorem,  fell  from  $18,971,539  in  1807  to  $4,765,737  in  1808.^ 

An  examination  of  the  trade  of  the  United  States,  with  the 
leading  countries  of  the  world  is  worth  considering  at  this 
time.  In  1807  the  value  of  our  exports  of  domestic  origin 
to  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  was  $21,122,332 ;  in  1808,  $3,093,- 
978;  exports  of  foreign  produce  fell  from  $2,027,650  in  1807 
to  $106,327  in  1808.  The  total  value  of  our  exports  to  those 
countries  thus  declined  from  $23,149,982  in  1807  to  $3,200,- 
305  in  1808.  In  the  following  year  exports  of  domestic  pro- 
duce increased  to  $5,326,194  and  of  foreign  produce  to  $239,- 
405,  a  combined  total  of  $5,565,599.  Our  dutied  imports  from 
Great  Britain  and  Ireland  fell  from  $38,901,838  to  $18,818,- 
882  in  1808  and  to  $17,647,542  in  1803.  A  casual  glance 
shows  that  while  we  sold  Great  Britain  only  about  one  eighth 
as  much  as  formerly,  we  bought  nearly  half  as  much  as  we  had 


1  Pitkin,    Timothy,    Statistical    View    of   the    United   States,    p.    81. 

2  Ibid.,   p.    167. 

3  Ibid.,  pp.   201,   202. 

204 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  205 

bought  in  previous  times.  The  direct  trade  of  the  United 
States  with  the  British  West  Indies  was  cut  down  very  much 
by  the  embargo,  whereas  the  trade  of  Canada  increased.  The 
total  value  of  the  exports  from  Quebec  to  the  British  West 
Indies  in  1806  was  £551,570  6s.  3d.;  in  1810,  it  was  £1,079,- 
474  lis,  6d.  Lumber  exports  increased  during  this  pe- 
riod from  £110.740  lis.  6d.  to  £505,689  15s.  6d.  The 
exports  of  grain,  provisions,  pot  and  pearl  ashes  also  in- 
creased. Much  of  this  was  due  to  the  clandestine  trade  be- 
tween Canada  and  the  United  States.  Moreover,  many  citi- 
zens of  the  United  States,  especially  those  interested  in  the 
lumber  trade,  deprived  of  emplo>Tnent  at  home,  went  to 
Canada  and  New  Brunswick  to  find  work.* 

The  value  of  the  domestic  produce  exported  to  France  fell 
from  $2,715,141  in  1807  to  $708,670  in  1808,  while  the  value 
of  the  exports  of  foreign  produce  fell  from  $10,315,678  to 
$2,126,396.  The  combined  values  thus  decreased  from  $13,- 
030,819  in  1807  to  $2,835,066.  There  were  no  direct  exports 
in  1809,  and  in  the  following  year  the  domestic  exports  were 
valued  at  $16,782,  and  the  foreign  exports  at  $1,672,  or  the 
insignificant  total  of  $18,454.  England,  by  her  control  of  the 
sea.  managed  to  gain  possession  of  the  French  West  Indies 
in  1807,  and  retained  them  until  general  peace  was  restored 
in  Europe.  Our  domestic  exports  to  the  French  West  Indies 
were  worth  $2,901,516  in  1807  and  $165,232  in  1814;  our  ex- 
ports of  foreign  origin  in  the  same  years  were  worth  $2,968,- 
816  and  $12,947.  Trade,  virtually  annihilated  by  embargo  and 
war,  picked  up  to  some  extent  after  the  French  regained 
possession.^ 

In  1807,  the  value  of  exports  of  domestic  produce  to  Spain 
was  $1,181,231  and  of  foreign  produce  was  $3,547,907;  in 
1808  these  .totals  fell  to  $541,378  and  $901,003.  The  combined 
values  thus  decreased  from  $4,729,138  in  1807  to  $1,442,381 
in  1808.  Our  exports  to  the  Spanish  West  Indies  and  Ameri- 
can colonies  likewise  decreased.  The  value  of  exports  of  do- 
mestic produce  fell  from  $2,470,472  in  1807  to  $631,086  in 
1808,   while  the  value  of   exports  of   foreign  origin   declined 


4  Ibid.,    p.    219. 

5  Ibid.,    pp.     222-226. 


206      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

from  $9,870,753  to  $3,545,967.  The  totals  thus  fell  from  $12,- 
341,225  to  $4,177,053.«  In  1809  they  were  back  to  $3,352,271 
for  the  domestic,  $3,333,346  for  the  foreign,  and  $6,685,617 
for  both. 

The  exports  to  Portugal  of  domestic  origin  fell  from 
$829,313  in  1807  to  $342,277  in  1808.  Unlike  the  case  with 
France  and  Spain,  our  exports  of  foreign  origin  were  worth 
less  than  those  of  domestic  origin.  The  former  were  worth 
$159,173  in  1807  and  apparently  nothing  in  1808.  Trade  de- 
clined, because  of  the  embargo,  from  $988,486  in  1807  to 
$342,277  in  1808.  During  the  American  non-intercourse  acts, 
numerous  articles  ultimately  destined  to  Great  Britain  and 
other  European  countries  went  to  Portuguese  possessions.  In 
1809,  the  value  of  domestic  produce,  consisting  largely  of 
cotton,  shipped  to  Madeira  was  $2,336,656;  the  value  of  the 
produce  shipped  to  Fayal  and  the  other  Azores,  also  largely 
cotton,  was  $2,926,482.  After  the  action  of  Napoleon  had 
caused  the  Portuguese  government  to  move  to  Brazil,  our 
trade  with  Portuguese  America  increased.  In  1807  it  was 
worth  about  five  thousand  dollars;  in  1809  almost  nine  hun- 
dred thousand  and  in  1810  over  one  million  six  hundred 
thousand.  Figures  were  not  given  by  Pitkin  for  1808,  but  in 
1809  the  value  of  the  exports  of  domestic  produce  was  $540,- 
653  and  of  foreign  produce  $343,082.  The  next  year  the 
figures  stood  at  $721,899  and  $889,839.^ 

Before  the  embargo  was  passed,  the  United  States  was  trying 
to  coax  into  growth  a  sickly  trade  with  Russia.  In  1807  the 
exports  of  domestic  origin  were  worth  $78,850  and  of  foreign 
origin  $366,367;  in  1808  no  exports  of  either  domestic  or 
foreign  origin  were  recorded.  The  next  three  years,  however, 
saw  a  rapid  growth  until  the  trade  was  checked  by  the  out- 
break of  the  War  of  1812.  In  1809,  exports  of  domestic 
origin  were  worth  $146,462  and  of  foreign  origin  $737,799; 
in  1810,  the  figures  stood  $1,048,762  and  $2,926,936;  in  1811, 
they  were  $1,630,499  and  $4,507,158.« 

AVith  Sweden  the  ordinary  trade  of  the  United  States  was 

6  Ibid.,   pp.    227-229. 

7  Ibid.,   pp.   231,   232.  ^ 

8  Ibid.,  p.   233. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  207 

small.  After  the  repeal  of  the  embargo,  though,  the  trade 
increased.  Much  of  this  was  in  cotton,  in  all  probability 
destined  for  Great  Britain,  and  in  colonial  produce  intended 
for  northern  Europe.  In  1S09,  the  value  of  domestic  exports, 
largely  cotton  and  tobacco,  regularly  cleared  for  Swedish  ports 
was  $4,030,395,  and  the  value  of  foreign  produce  was  $1,409,- 
303;  in  1810,  the  figures  were  $1,563,336  and  $4,294,397. 
From  nearly  six  millions  in  1810,  however,  the  total  dropped 
to  $240,807  in  1815;  $204,066  of  this  was  in  exports  of  domes- 
tic origin.  In  1807  the  exports  of  domestic  produce  ship- 
ped to  the  West  Indies  amounted  to  $416,509  and  the  exports 
of  foreign  produce  to  $911,155.  With  the  embargo,  these,  of 
course,  declined,  but  with  the  partial  repeal,  exports  increased 
again.  In  1809,  our  exports  of  domestic  produce  to  the  Swed- 
ish West  Indies  were  valued  at  $2,757,859  and  of  foreign  pro- 
duce at  $887,960.9 

The  value  of  our  exports  to  Denmark  and  Norway  was,  for 
domestic  produce,  $572,150  and  for  foreign  produce  $836,468 
in  1807;  in  1809  the  figures  were  $958,584  and  $3,327,766; 
and  in  1810,  $3,962,739  and  $6,548,051.  These  figures,  as  in 
other  cases,  simply  showed  that  commerce  untrammeled  by 
commercial  restrictions  would  find  new  outlets.  They  indicate 
also  that  much  of  the  trade  was  intended  for  countries  other 
than  those  to  which  the  goods  were  shipped.  Our  exports 
to  the  Danish  West  Indies,  in  common  with  other  places,  were 
lowered  by  the  embargo  and  by  the  AVar  of  1812.  In  1807 
the  domestic  exports  were  valued  at  $1,614,711  and  the  foreign 
exports  at  $1,505,988;  in  1815  the  figures  stood  at  $496,249 
and  $47,720.1° 

Our  exports  to  Hamburg,  Bremen,  other  Hanse  towns  and 
the  ports  of  Germany,  but  largely  to  Hamburg,  were  greatly 
handicapped  by  the  embargo.  In  1807,  the  value  of  exports 
of  domestic  produce  was  $912,225  and  of  foreign  produce  $2,- 
248,057;  in  1808  the  figures  were  $24,963  and  $204,852;  and 
in  1809,  $709,981  and  $1,682,662.  The  figures  for  the  three 
years  thus  amounted  to  $3,160,282,  $229,815,  and  $2,392,643." 

9  Ibid.,  pp.   236,   237. 

10  Ibid.,  pp.  237-239. 

11  Ibid.,    p.    241. 


208      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

Our  profitable  export  trade  with  Holland  was  well-nigh  wreck- 
ed by  the  embargo.  In  1807  the  value  of  the  exports  of  domestic 
origin  was  $3,098,234  and  of  foreign  produce  $13,086,160;  in 
1808,  the  figures  were  $382,121  and  $2,227,722 ;  in  1809,  $421,- 
294  and  $697,070;  in  1810,  $74,194  and  $28,992;  and  in  1811 
apparently  nothing.  They  thus  fell  from  $16,184,394  in  1807 
to  $2,609,843  in  1808,  to  $1,118,364  in  1809,  to  $103,186  in  1810. 
Exports  did  not  reach  a  third  of  the  value  recorded  in  1810 
until  after  the  war  of  1812  had  closed.  In  1815,  however, 
they  passed  the  four  million  dollar  mark  again.  Our  exports 
to  the  Dutch  West  Indies  and  American  colonies  decreased 
in  much  the  same  proportion.  In  1807,  the  exports  of  domes- 
tic produce  to  these  possessions  amounted  to  $496,010  and  of 
foreign  produce  to  $307,366;  in  1808,  the  figures  were  $97,- 
734  and  $14,839;  in  1809,  $33,412  and  $771;  and  in  1810, 
$39,724  and  $31.  The  totals  thus  decreased  from  $803,376  to 
$112,573  to  $34,183  and  then  rose  in  1810  to  $39,755.^^ 

Our  domestic  exports  to  Italy  were  valued  at  $250,257  and 
our  exports  of  foreign  origin  at  $5,499,722  in  1807.  In  1808 
the  figures  were  $58,085  and  $1,312,173;  in  1809,  $49,206  and 
$1,106,539.  The  totals  stood  at  $5,749,979;  $1,370,258;  and 
$728,494.  The  latter  figure  was  not  again  reached  until  1816 
when  it  was  doubled.^^  Other  countries  such  as  China  might 
be  considered,  but  the  trade  was  inconsiderable  and  showed 
the  same  general  effects  from  the  embargo  as  those  already 
considered.  Before  passing  on  to  the  particular  products  and 
different  states,  however,  part  of  a  table  given  in  Chapter 
I  will  be  duplicated.^* 

12  Ibid.,   pp.   241-244. 

13  Ibid.,    p.    246. 

14  Ibid.,    pp.    275,    276. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809 


209 


Exports 

from  the  United  States  to 

Europe 
Domestic                Foreign 

Domestic 

Asia 

Foreign 

1807 

$31,012,947 

$38,882,633 

$      497,769 

$  1,598,445 

1808 

5,185,720 

7,202,232 

26,649 

267,542 

1809 

17,838,502 

13,072,045 

703,900 

1,218,228 

1810 

27,202,534 

17,786,614 

377,795 

406,646 

Africa 
Domestic 

Foreign 

West  Indies, 
Domestic 

Amer.  Cont.,  etc. 
Foreign 

1807 

$  1,296,375 

$  1,627,177 

$15,892,501 

$17,535,303 

1808 

278,544 

218,950 

3,939,633 

5,308,690 

1809 

3,132,687 

1,472,819 

9,732,613 

5,034,439 

1810 

2,549,744 

722,777 

12,236,602 

5,475,258 

A  casual  glance  at  this  table  will  show  that  in  both  1807 
and  1808  the  value  of  the  exports  of  foreign  origin  was  great- 
er than  the  value  of  domestic  products.  It  is  thus  apparent 
that  the  section  carrying  the  largest  part  of  these  foreign 
products  would  make  the  largest  profits  and  would  protest 
loudest  when  that  trade  was  interfered  with.  As  the  reader 
already  knows,  the  noise  came  largely  from  New  England 
and  New  York. 

Just  at  this  time  it  seems  advisable  to  examine  some  of  the 
leading  exports  of  the  country  1806-1810.  This  may  be  done 
under  four  heads:  products  of  the  sea,  products  of  the  forest, 
products  of  the  farm,  and  manufactures.  The  use  of  tables 
tends  to  simplify  matters;  hence  they  will  be  used  very 
freely : 

Fish   Exportsis 


Tear 

Dried  Fish 
quintals 

Pickled  Fish 
barrels 

Pickled  Fish 
kegs 

1806 

537,457 

64,615 

10,155 

1807 

473,924 

57,621 

13,743 

1808 

155,808 

18,957 

3,036 

1809 

345,648 

54,777 

9,380 

1810 

280,804 

34,674 

5,964 

Tear 

Value  of  Cod  or 
Dried  Fish 

Value  of  Pickled 
Fish 

Total  for  Produce 
of  Sea 

1806 

$2,150,000 

$366,000 

$3,116,000 

1807 

1,896,000 

302,000 

2,804,000 

1808 

623,000 

98,000 

832,000 

1809 

1,123,000 

282,000 

1,710,000 

1810 

913,000 

214,000 

1,481,000 

15  Ibid., 

pp.   40-47. 

210      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 


The  last  column  includes  the  value  of  the  whale  fisheries 
also.  The  value  of  the  common  whale  oil  and  bone  for  the 
years  mentioned  above  was  $418,000 ;  $476,000 ;  $88,000 ;  $169,- 
000;  and  $222,000.  For  the  same  years  the  value  of  the  sper- 
maceti oil  and  candles  was  $182,000 ;  $130,000 ;  $33,000 ;  $136,- 
000;  and  $132,000.i«' 

The  value  of  the  principal  exports  of  the  forest  and  their 
combined  value  may  likewise  be  shown  by  table: 
Exports   of  the  Foresti^ 


Year 
1806 
1807 
1808 
1809 
1810 

Year 

1806 
1807 
1808 
1809 
1810 


Lumber  of 
all  kinds 

$2,495,000 

2,637,000 

723,000 

1,843,000 

2,537,000 

Ginseng 

$139,000 
143,000 


Naval 
stores 
$409,000 
335,000 
102,000 
737,000 
473,000 


Pot  and 
Pearl  Ashes 
$    935,000 

1,490,000 
408,000 

1,506,000 

1,579,000 


Oak  bark  and 

other  dyes 

$42,000 

19,000 

5,000 

29,000 

72,000 


136,000 
140,000 

The  following  tables   show   the    amount 
leading  exports  of  vegetable  food:^® 


and 


Furs  and 
skins 

$841,000 
852,000 
161,000 
332,000 
177,000 

Total 
value 
$4,861,000 
5,476,000 
1,399,000 
4,583,000 
4,978,000 

value   of   the 


Year 
1806 
1807 
1808 
1809 
1810 

Year 
1806 
1807 
1808 
1809 
1810 


Wheat 
bushels 
86,784 
766,814 
87,330 
393,889 
325,924 

Corn 
bushels 
1,064,263 
1,018,721 
249,533 
522,047 
1,054,252 


Flour 
barrels 
782,724 
1,249,819 
263,813 
846,247 
798,431 

Meal 

bushels 

108,342 

136,460 

30,818 

57,260 

86,744 


Value  of 

both 

$  6,867,000 

10,753,000 

1,936,000 

5,944,000 

6,846,000 

Value  of 
both 
$1,286,000 
987,000 
298,000 
547,000 
1,138,000 


Bice 

tierces 

102,627 

94,692 

9,228 

116,907 

131,341 


Value 

$2,617,000 

2,367,000 

221,000 

2,104,000 

2,626,000 

Total  value  of 

vegetable  exports 

$11,850,000 

14,432,000 

2,550,000 

8,751,000 

10,750,000 


16  Ibid.,   p.  46. 

17  Ihid.,   pp.  49,  50. 

18  Ihid.,    pp.  109-123. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809 


211 


Beef,  pork,  tallow,  hams,  butter  and  cheese,  lard,  live  cattle, 
and  horses  were  considerable  articles  of  export  from  the 
United  States,  especially  from  some  of  the  northern  states 
where  the  land  was  better  adapted  for  grazing.  The  following 
table  shows  the  amount  and  value  of  these  exports : 
Produce  of  Animalsi^ 


Beef 

Fori- 

Beef,  tallow,  hides        Butter  and 

Year 

barrels 

barrels 

and  live  cattle 

cheese 

1806 

117,419 

36,277 

$1,360,000 

$481,000 

1807 

84,209 

39,247 

1,108,000 

490,000 

1808 

20,101 

15,478 

265,000 

196,000 

1809 

28,555 

42,652 

425,000 

264,000 

1810 

47,699 

37,209 

747,000 

318,000 

Forlc,  hacon,  lard 

Horses  and 

Sheep 

Aggregate  value 

Year 

and  live  stock 

mules 

1806 

$1,096,000 

$321,000 

$16,000 

$3,274,000 

1807 

1,157,000 

317,000 

14,000 

3,086,00U 

1808 

398,000 

105,000 

4,000 

968,000 

1809 

1,001,000 

113,000 

8,000 

1,811,000 

1810 

907,000 

185,000 

12,000 

2,169,000 

Tobacco  was  produced  principally  in  Maryland  and  Virginia, 
and  found  its  markets  chiefly  in  Great  Britain,  France,  Hol- 
land, and  northern  Europe  in  normal  times.  The  following 
table  shows  the  form  in  which  tobacco  was  exported  and  the 
value  of  that  sent  out  in  the  raw  state: 


Tobacco 

20 

Year 

Hogsheads 

Manufactured, 

lbs. 

Snuff,  lbs. 

Value  of  raw 

1806 

83,186 

385,727 

42,212 

$6,572,000 

1807 

62,186 

236,004 

59,768 

5,476,000 

1808 

9,576 

26,656 

25,845 

833,000 

1809 

53,921 

314,880 

35,955 

3,774,000 

1810 

84,134 

495,427 

46,640 

5,048,000 

Most  of  the  cotton  exported  from  the  United  States  went 
to  Great  Britain.  During  the  continuance  of  commercial  re- 
strictions, the  largest  part  of  cotton  reached  Great  Britain 
by  way  of  the  Floridas.  the  Azores,  IMadcira,  Spain,  Portugal, 
and  Sweden.  The  following  table  shows  the  amount  of  cotton 
exported  and  its  value : 


19  Ibid.,    pp.     124-126. 

20  Ibid.,    pp.    127-129. 


212      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

Cotton2i 


Sea  island 

Upland 

Value 

Amount  to 

Amount  to 

Year 

pounds 

pounds 

Great  Britain 

France 

pounds 

1806 

6,096,082 

29,561,383 

$  8,332,000 

24,256,457 

7,082,118 

1807 

8,926,011 

55,018,448 

14,232,000 

53,180,211 

6,114,358 

1808 

•    949,051 

9,681,384 

2,221,000 

7,992,593 

2,087,450 

1809 

8,654,213 

42,326,042 

8,515,000 

13,365,987 

None  direct 

1810 

8,604,078 

84,657,384 

15,108,000 

36,171,915 

None  direct 

Other  agricultural  exports  were  flax  seed,  indigo,  wax,  flax, 
and  poultry.  The  former  was  the  most  important  and  will 
be  the  only  one  considered  here.  It  went  for  the  most  part 
to  Ireland.  The  exports  amounted  to  352,280  bushels  in  1806 
and  were  valued  at  $529,000.  For  the  four  following  years 
the  totals  stood:  1807—301,242  and  $452,000;  1808—102,930 
and  $131,000;  1809—184,311  and  $230,000;  and  1810—240,579 
and  $301,000.^' 

The  exports  of  manufactures  fell  into  two  principal  classes: 
those  made  from  domestic  materials  and  those  made  from 
foreign  materials.  In  the  first  class  were  such  things  as  soap, 
tallow  candles,  leather,  boots,  shoes,  saddlery,  hats,  manufac- 
tures of  grain  (spirits,  beer,  starch,  etc.),  manufactures  of 
wood  (furniture,  couches,  etc.),  cordage,  canvass,  linseed  oil, 
iron,  snuff,  silk  shoes,  wax  candles,  tobacco,  lead,  bricks,  tur- 
pentine, spirits,  wool  and  cotton  cards,  etc.  In  the  second 
class  came  spirits  made  from  molasses,  refined  sugar,  chocolate, 
gun  powder,  brass,  copper,  and  medicine,  etc.  The  value  of 
both  kinds  of  manufactures  is  shown  by  the  table.^^ 


From  domestic 

Manufactures 

Value  of 

Year 

materials 

foreign  material 

both 

1806 

$1,889,000 

$818,000 

$2,707,000 

1807 

1,652,000 

468,000 

2,120,000 

1808 

309,000 

35,000 

344,000 

1809 

1,266,000 

240,000 

1,506,000 

1810 

1,359,000 

558,000 

1,917,000 

By 

way 

of  recapitulation, 

130-139. 

the  following  summary 

is  offered: 

21   Ibid. 

pp. 

22  Ibid. 

pp. 

140 

141. 

23  ibid. 

.  p- 

144. 

THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809 


213 


Exports  of   Domestic   Origin24 


Year 

Of  Sea 

Of  Forest 

Of  Agriculture 

Of  Manufactures 

1806 

$3,116,000 

$4,861,000 

$30,125,000 

$2,707,000 

1807 

2,804,000 

5,476,000 

37,832,000 

2,120,000 

1808 

832,000 

1,399,000 

6,746,000 

344,000 

1809 

1,710,000 

4,583,000 

23,234,000 

1,506,000 

1810 

1,481,000 

4,978,000 

33,502,000 

1,917,000 

Year 

Total  domestic 

origin        Total  foreign  origin 

Grand  total 

1806 

$41,253,7 

27 

$60,283,236 

$101,536,963 

1807 

48,699,592 

59,643,558 

108,343,150 

1808 

9,433,546 

12,997,414 

22,430,960 

1809 

31,405,7 

02 

20,797,531 

52,203,233 

1810 

42,366,6 

75 

24,391,295 

66,757,970 

It  seems  advisable,  further,  to  consider  the  decreases  in  the 
different  articles  of  domestic  produce  as  they  affected  the 
different  parts  of  the  country.  A  large  part  of  the  fishery 
and  forest  products  came  from  New  England  and  New  York. 
The  decline  in  the  value  of  the  products  of  the  sea  was  from 
$2,804,000  in  1807  to  $832,000  in  1808,  or  70  per  cent;  in 
products  of  the  forest  it  was  from  $5,476,000  to  $1,399,000, 
or  74  per  cent.  In  1807  the  value  of  the  raw  tobacco  export- 
ed was  the  same  as  that  of  the  lumber,  $5,476,000,  but  it  fell 
to  $833,000  in  1808  or  85  per  cent.  Practically  all  of  the 
tobacco  came  from  Virginia  and  Maryland.  The  value  of  the 
cotton  exported  in  1807,  practically  double  the  value  of  the 
sea  and  forest  exports,  fell  from  $14,232,000  to  $2,221,000,  or 
84  per  cent.  Cotton,  of  course,  was  largely  a  product  of  the 
states  south  of  Virginia.  The  exports  of  wheat  and  flour  fell 
in  value  from  $10,753,000  in  1807  to  $1,936,000  in  1808,  or  82 
per  cent.  It  will,  of  course,  be  remembered  that  the  great  wheat 
producing  states  were  then  Virginia  and  jMaryland  as  well  as 
Pennsylvania  and  New  York.  Rice,  exclusively  a  southern 
product,  fell  in  export  value  from  $2,367,000  to  $221,000,  or 
90  per  cent.  The  value  of  the  corn  and  meal  exported,  never 
very  great  but  produced  in  the  South  as  well  as  in  the  North, 
fell  from  $987,000  to  $298,000,  or  70  per  cent.  The  aggre- 
gate value  of  animal  produce  exported,  common  to  all  sections 
of  the  country,  but  particularly  the  North,  fell  from  $3,086.- 
000  to  $968,000  or  69  per  cent.    The  total  value  of  agricultural 


24  Ibid.,    pp,    36,    37,    145,    146. 


214      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

exports  fell  from  $37,832,000  to  $6,746,000,  or  82  per  cent. 
Since  the  exports  of  cotton  and  raw  tobacco  alone  make  up 
over  half  the  value  of  agricultural  exports  in  1807,  it  will 
scarcely  be  denied  that  the  South  suffered  most  from  the  em- 
bargo in  so  far  as  it  affected  immediate  agricultural  exports. 
This  belief  is  strengthened  by  the  fact  that  the  exportation 
of  both  of  these  articles  decreased  more  than  did  northern 
products.  In  fact,  the  writer  believes  that  more  than  half  of 
the  loss  occasioned  agricultural  interests  by  the  embargo  fell 
on  the  southern  farmers.  The  export  of  manufactures,  well 
nigh  negligible,  but  largely  limited  to  the  states  north  of  the 
Mason  and  Dixon  line,  fell  from  $2,120,000  to  $344,000,  or  83 
per  cent,  a  smaller  loss  than  occurred  in  either  cotton  or  tobac- 
co. From  these  figures,  considered  as  a  whole,  it  seems  prob- 
able that  the  loss  in  domestic  exports  occasioned  by  the  em- 
bargo south  of  the  Mason  and  Dixon  line  was  greater  than  the 
loss  north  of  that  line. 

The  following  tables  show  the  value  of  the  total  exports, 
the  exports  of  domestic  products,  and  the  exports  of  foreign 
products  for  each  state  of  the  Union,  1806-1810: 


Total  Exports25 

States  and 

1806 

1807 

1808 

1809 

1810 

Territories 

N.  H. 

$      795,263 

$      680,022 

$      125,059 

$      286,595 

$      234,650 

Vt. 

193,775 

204,285 

108,772 

175,782 

432,631 

Mass. 

21,199,243 

20,112,125 

5,128,322 

12,142,293 

13,013,048 

E.   I. 

2,091,835 

1,657,565 

242,034 

1,284,532 

1,331,576 

Conn. 

1,715,828 

1,624,727 

413,691 

666,513 

768,643 

N.   Y. 

21,762,845 

26,357,936 

5,606,058 

12,581,562 

17,242,330 

N.  J. 

33,867 

41,186 

20,799 

319,175 

430,267 

Penn. 

17,574,702 

16,864,744 

4,013,330 

9,049,241 

10,993,398 

Del. 

500,106 

229,275 

108,735 

138,036 

120,342 

Md. 

14,580,905 

14,298,984 

2,721,106 

6,627,326 

6,489,018 

D.  C. 

1,246,146 

1,446,378 

285,317 

703,415 

1,038,103 

Va. 

5,055,396 

4,761,234 

526,473 

2,894,125 

4,822,611 

N.   C. 

789,605 

745,162 

117,129 

322,994 

403,949 

s.  c. 

9,743,782 

10,912,564 

1,664,445 

3,247,341 

5,290,614 

Ga. 

82,764 

3,744,845 

24,626 

1,082,108 

2,238,686 

Ohio 

62,318 
53. 

28,889 

13,115 

• 

3,850 

10,583 

25  Jbid.,  p. 

180G 

1807 

1808 

1809 

1810 

221,260 

311,947 

50,848 

136,114 

3,615 

701 

305 

2,958 

3,887,323 

4,320,555 

1,261,101 

541,926 

1,890,948 

THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  215 

States  and 

Territories 
Mich. 
Miss. 
Orleans 

Total      $101,536,963  $108,343,150     $22,430,960     $52,203,233     $66,757,970 

A  comparison  of  the  figures  in  the  columns  for  1807  and 
1808  tends  to  strengthen  the  convictions  previously  recorded. 
In  1808,  the  exports  of  New  Hampshire  were  about  one-fifth  of 
what  they  had  been  in  the  previous  year,  those  of  Vermont 
one-half,  those  of  Massachusetts  one-fourth,  those  of  Rhode 
Island  one-seventh,  and  those  of  Connecticut  one-fourth.  Pas- 
sing on  to  the  Middle  States  and  again  making  the  rough 
comparisons,  we  find  that  in  1808  the  exports  of  New  York 
fell  to  one-fifth  of  the  amount  recorded  in  1807,  those  of  New 
Jersey  to  one-half,  of  Pennsylvania  to  one-fourth,  and  of 
Delaware  to  one-half.  In  the  states  then  considered  as  south- 
ern, Maryland's  exports  dropped  to  one-fifth  of  the  amount 
in  1807,  District  of  Columbia  to  one-fifth,  Virginia  to  one- 
ninth.  North  Carolina  to  one-sixth.  South  Carolina  to  one- 
sixth,  and  Georgia  to  one-one  hundred-and-fifty-second.  Making 
a  comparison  in  a  different  and  a  more  accurate  way,  New 
England's  exports  fell  from  $24,278,723  to  $6,017,878  or  75 
per  cent;  the  exports  from  the  Middle  States  fell  from  $43,- 
493,168  to  $9,748,922  or  78  per  cent;  the  exports  from  the 
Southern  States  fell  from  $35,909,167  to  $5,339,096  or  85  per 
cent.  For  the  country  as  a  whole  they  fell  79  per  cent.  These 
comparisons  thus  show  that  in  the  export  of  all  products, 
foreign  or  domestic,  the  New  England  section  showed  the 
smallest  decline  whereas  the  southern  section  showed  the 
greatest  decrease.  It  must,  however,  be  borne  in  mind,  as  will 
be  pointed  out  again  later,  that  New  England  ships  did  a 
lot  of  carrying  for  the  southern  states. 

Exports  of  Domestic  Growth,  Produce,  and  Manufacture^^ 

26  Ibid.,    p.    55. 


216      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 


States  and 

1806 

1807 

1808 

1809 

1810 

Territories 

; 

N.  H.    $ 

411,379 

$   365,950 

$   122,294 

$   201,063 

$   225,623 

Vt. 

91,732 

148,469 

83,103 

125,881 

406,138 

Mass. 

6,621,096 

6,185,748 

1,508,632 

0,022,729 

5,761,771 

E.  I. 

949,336 

741,988 

139,684 

658,397 

874,870 

Conn. 

1,522,750 

1,519,083 

397,781 

655,258 

762,785 

N.  Y. 

8,053,076 

9,957,416 

2,362,438 

8,348,764 

10,928,573 

N.  J. 

26,504 

36,063 

12,511 

269,104 

392,798 

Penn. 

3,765,313 

4,809,616 

1,066,527 

4,238,358 

4,751,634 

Del. 

125,787 

77,695 

38,052 

96,495 

79,988 

Md. 

3,661,131 

4,016,699 

764,992 

2,570,957 

3,275,904 

D.  C. 

1,091,760 

1,363,352 

281,936 

681,650 

984,463 

Va. 

4,626,687 

4,393,521 

508,124 

2,786,161 

4,632,829 

N.  C. 

786,029 

740,933 

117,129 

322,834 

401,465 

s.  c. 

6,797,064 

7,129,365 

1,404,04B 

2,861,369 

4,881,840 

Ga. 

*82,764 

3,710,776 

24,626 

1,082,108 

2,234,912 

Ohio 

62,318 

28,889 

13,115 

3,850 

10,583 

Mich. 

221,260 

311,947 

50,848 

136,114 

3,571 

Miss. 

701 

305 

2,958 

Orleans 

2,357,141 

3,161,381 

537,711 

344,305 

1,753,970 

Total        $41,253,727     $48,699,592     $  9,433,546     $31,405,702     $42,366,675 

Exports  of  Foreign  Growth,  Produce,  and  Manufacture^^ 


States  and 

1806 

1807 

1808 

1809 

1810 

Territories 

N.  H. 

$   383,884 

$   314,072 

$    2,765 

$   85,532 

$    9,027 

Vt. 

102,043 

55,816 

25,669 

49,901 

26,493 

Mass. 

14,577,547 

13,926,377 

3,619,090 

6,119,564 

7,251,277 

E.  I. 

1,142,499 

915,576 

102,350 

626,135 

456,706 

Conn. 

193,078 

105,644 

15,910 

11,255 

5,858 

N.  Y. 

13,709,769 

16,400,547 

3,243,620 

4,232,798 

6,313,757 

N.  J. 

7,363 

5,123 

8,288 

50,071 

37,469 

Penn. 

13,809,389 

12,055,128 

2,946,803 

4,810,883 

6,241,764 

Del. 

374,319 

151,580 

70,683 

41,541 

40,354 

Md. 

10,919,774 

10,282,285 

1,956,114 

4,056,369 

3,213,114 

D.  C. 

154,386 

83,026 

3,381 

21,765 

53,640 

Ya. 

428,709 

307,713 

18,349 

107,964 

189,782 

N.  C. 

3,576 

4,229 

160 

2,484 

S.  C. 

2,946,718 

3,783,199 

260,402 

385,972 

408,774 

Ga. 

34,069 

3,774 

Mich. 

44 

Orleans 

1,530,182 

1,159,174 

723,390 

197,621 

136,978 

Total 

$60,283,236 

$59,643,558 

$12,997,414 

$20,797,531 

$24,391,295 

*   Does  not  include  Savannah's  exports  which  were  worth  about  $2,250,000. 
27  Ibid.,    pp.    57,    58 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  217 

An  examination  of  the  two  preceding  tables  shows  some  in- 
teresting things  with  regard  to  the  effects  of  the  embargo  ^on 
trade.  Domestic  exports  sent  out  from  New  Hampshire  fell 
to  about  one-third  of  the  value  in  1807,  those  from  Vermont 
to  three-fifths,  from  Massachusetts  to  one-fourth,  from  Rhode 
Island  to  one-fifth,  and  from  Connecticut  to  one-fourth.  The 
decline  in  the  Middle  States  was  to  about  one-fourth  in  New 
York,  one-third  in  New  Jersey,  one-fifth  in  Pennsylvania,  and 
one-half  in  Delaware.  In  the  Southern  States  the  decrease 
roughly  speaking  was  to  one-fifth  in  Maryland,  to  one-sixth 
in  the  District  of  Columbia,  to  one-ninth  in  Virginia,  to  one- 
seventh  in  North  Carolina,  to  one-fifth  in  South  Carolina,  and 
to  one-one  hundred-and-fifty-first  in  Georgia.  Grouping  by 
sections  and  estimating  more  accurately,  we  find  that  the  New 
England  States  fell  from  $8,961,238  in  1807  to  $2,251,494 
in  1808,  or  75  per  cent ;  the  Middle  States  fell  from  $14,880,- 
790  to  $3,479,528,  or  77  per  cent;  the  Southern  States  de- 
clined from  $21,354,646  to  $3,100,850  or  85  per  cent.  Domestic 
exports  as  a  whole  decreased  79  per  cent. 

The  exports  of  foreign  products  fell  to  one-one-hundred-and- 
fourteenth  oi  their  value  in  New  Hampshire,  to  one-half  their 
value  in  Vermont,  to  one-fourth  their  value  in  Massachusetts, 
to  one-ninth  their  value  in  Rhode  Island,  and  to  one-seventh 
of  their  value  in  Connecticut.  In  the  Middle  States  they  fell 
to  one-fifth  their  value  in  New  York,  increased  by  more  than 
half  in  New  Jersey,  fell  to  one-fourth  in  Pennsylvania,  and 
to  less  than  one-half  in  Delaware.  In  the  Southern  Section  they 
fell  to  one-fifth  their  former  value  in  M;aryland,  to  one-twenty- 
fifth  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  to  one-twentieth  in  Virginia, 
to  nothing  in  North  Carolina,  to  one-fifteenth  in  South  Caro- 
lina, and  to  nothing  in  Georgia.  Again,  speaking  more  accur- 
ately and  by  sections,  the  exports  of  foreign  produce  fell  from 
$15,317,485  to  $3,766,384  or  75  percent  in  New  England,  from 
$28,612,378  to  $6,269,394,  or  80  per  cent,  in  the  Middle 
States,  and  from  $14,554,521  to  $2,238,246,  or  85  per  cent,  in 
the  Southern  States.  Re-exports  decreased  as  a  whole,  78  per 
cent. 

The  percentages  varied  little,  considered  by  groups,  in  the 
three  tables,   but  there  were  wide   variations  in  the   case   of 


218      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

individual  states.  Some  of  these  will  be  noticed.  Vermont 
lost  about  two-thirds  of  her  export  trade  in  domestic  products, 
but  practically  all  of  her  export  trade  in  foreign  products. 
Ehode  Island  and  Connecticut  lost  a  little  larger  percentage  of 
their  foreign  exports  than  of  their  domestic.  New  Jersey  lost 
about  two-thirds  of  her  domestic  exports,  but  increased  her 
exports  of  foreign  products  by  more  than  half,  though  both 
were  inconsiderable.  Maryland  suffered  a  slightly  greater 
loss  in  the  export  of  her  domestic  products  than  of  foreign. 
The  District  of  Columbia  and  all  southern  states  showed  far 
greater  per  cent  decreases  in  the  export  of  foreign  produce 
than  in  the  export  of  domestic  produce.  The  southern  mer- 
chants engaged  in  the  re-exporting  trade  consequently  lost 
more,  considering  their  capital,  than  did  the  others.  Those 
in  the  Middle  States  suffered  next,  while  those  in  the  New 
England  States  suffered  least. 

In  comparing  the  different  sections  of  the  country  in  the 
domestic  export  trade,  it  seems  superfluous  to  point  out  that 
all  the  domestic  products  sent  from  a  certain  state  were  not 
necessarily  produced  there.  It  seems  certain  to  the  writer, 
however,  that  the  smallest  percentage  of  domestic  products 
produced  within  the  state  came  from  New  England,  the  next 
smallest  from  the  Middle  States,  and  the  largest  percentage 
from  the  Southern ;  hence  the  following  figures  will  not  be 
unfair  to  the  North.  In  the  Middle  States  the  value  of  do- 
mestic exports  was  nearly  twice  as  great  as  in  the  New  Eng- 
land States;  in  the  Southern  States  it  was  nearly  three  times 
as  great  as  in  New  England.  The  loss,  as  already  pointed  out, 
was  75  per  cent  in  the  Middle  States,  and  85  per  cent  in  the 
Southern  States.  In  New  England  the  largest  losses  were  sus- 
tained by:  Rhode  Island — 81  per  cent;  Massachusetts — 76  per 
cent;  and  Connecticut — 74  per  cent.  In  the  Middle  States  the 
heaviest  sufferers  were:  Pennsylvania — 78  per  cent  and  New 
York — 76  per  cent.  The  exports  of  New  Jersey  and  Delaware 
were  so  small  that  they  scarcely  affected  the  total.  In  order 
to  make  the  contrast  clearer,  the  decrease  percentage  for  all  the 
Southern  States  will  be  given  in  order :  Georgia — 99 ;  Virginia — 
88;  North  Carolina— 84;  Maryland— 81 ;  South  Carolina— 80; 
and  District  of  Columbia — 79.     It  is  thus  apparent  that  every 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809 


219 


southern  state  suffered  a  greater  decrease  in  exports  of  domes- 
tic produce  than  any  state  north  of  the  Mason  and  Dixon 
line.  Since  most  of  the  southern  exports  were  agricultural,  the 
conclusion  seems  obvious  that  southern  farmers  suffered  more 
than  those  in  the  IMiddle  States  who  in  turn  suffered  more  than 
those  in  the  New  England  States. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  should  be  kept  in  mind  that  even 
though  southern  merchants  engaged  in  the  export  business 
and  southern  farmers  suffered  more  from  the  embargo  than 
did  the  corresponding  classes  in  the  North,  it  was  largely  be- 
cause the  ships  engaged  in  the  carrjdng  trade  were  owned  in 
other  parts  of  the  country  and  that  vexatious  restrictions  were 
imposed  on  the  coastwise  trade  by  the  embargo.  Ships  engaged  in 
smuggling  could  get  cargoes  at  home.  The  following  tables 
show  the  registered  tonnage  employed  in  the  various  states, 
and  territories,  1806-1810 : 


Foreign 

rrade28 

1806 

1807 

1808 

1809 

1810 

States  and  Territories 

Tons 

95 

Tons 

95 

Tons 

95 

Tons 

95 

Tons 

95 

N.   H. 

20,606 

29 

22.367 

64 

20,101 

51 

23,010 

47 

24,534 

Mass. 

306,075 

87 

310,309 

69 

266,519 

91 

324,690 

8 

352,806 

82 

vt. 

301 

27 

301 

27 

301 

27 

476 

11 

494 

51 

R.   I. 

28,617 

19 

28,492 

24 

23,282 

93 

28,403 

55 

28.574 

93 

Conn. 

26,026 

37 

27.071 

11 

22,297 

87 

21,306 

46 

22.671 

35 

N.    Y. 

141,186 

14 

149,061 

61 

146,682 

61 

169,535 

39 

188,556 

73 

N.  J. 

891 

84 

952 

13 

525 

29 

15,596 

67 

17,338 

51 

Penn. 

86.728 

35 

93,993 

16 

94,658 

69 

106.621 

90 

109,628 

57 

Del. 

1,073 

29 

1,105 

755 

49 

1,461 

83 

1,242 

88 

Md. 

71.819 

92 

79.782 

49 

74,699 

43 

88,188 

55 

90,045 

16 

D.    C. 

7.797 

93 

8,643 

87 

6,556 

49 

7,482 

41 

9,416 

26 

Va. 

34,015 

29 

33,503 

5 

29.485 

28 

36,699 

29 

45,339 

78 

N.   C. 

22.180 

70 

21,894 

58 

16.623 

24 

23,161 

64 

26.472 

47 

S.  C. 

40.158 

61 

45,222 

85 

41,628 

11 

42.675 

74 

43.354 

77 

Ga. 

10.909 

89 

12.827 

18 

11,305 

46 

10.942 

83 

12.405 

41 

Ohio 

160 

Orleans 

9.735 

33 

68 

12.778 

68 
85 

13,629 

56 

54 

9.805 

86 
23 

11.386 

45 

Total 

808.284 

848.306 

769,053 

910,059 

984.269 

5 

The 

decrease 

in 

the   reg 

istered    ton 

nag 

e,     1807 

1808,    was 

only  79,253,  31/95.  All  states  showed  some  decrease  ex- 
cept Vermont,  Pennsylvania,  and  Orleans  Territory.  Over 
half  of  this  decrease  was  in  jNlassachusetts,  which  owned  slight- 
ly more  than  one-third   of  the  registered  tonnage.     If  then, 


28  Ibid.,  pp.  436,  437. 


220      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

no  compensating  gain  occurred  elsewhere,  Massachusetts  suf- 
fered heavily.  The  following  table,  however,  will  bear  close 
examination : 

Enrolled  Tonnage  employed  in  the  Coasting  Trade  I8O6-I8IO29 


180e 

1807 

1808 

1809 

1810 

States  and  Territories 

Tons 

95 

Tons 

95 

Tons 

95 

Tons 

95 

Tons 

95 

N.  H. 

1,560 

16 

3,602 

41 

3.866 

56 

3,066 

61 

2,863 

87 

Mass. 

89,892 

16 

89,982 

78 

127,893 

79 

113,325 

63 

107,260 

72 

R.  I. 

5,766 

47 

6,279 

53 

8,981 

54 

8.265 

83 

6.899 

11 

Conn. 

16.236 

26 

15.884 

93 

21,947 

27 

19,477 

70 

19,346 

83 

N.  Y. 

70,225 

68 

72,567 

43 

77,522 

10 

78.252 

61 

83,536 

60 

N.  J. 

19,654 

37 

20,535 

85 

22,539 

65 

23,268 

84 

23,927 

60 

Penn. 

9,252 

66 

10.355 

29 

13,455 

6 

13.497 

49 

14,255 

76 

Del. 

5,587 

72 

5,878 

2 

6,292 

56 

6,371 

94 

6,261 

74 

Md. 

38,879 

88 

40,400 

18 

46,916 

38 

47,715 

69 

46,247 

92 

D.  C. 

3,968 

31 

4,073 

58 

4.772 

70 

5,125 

32 

4,783 

1 

Va. 

28,244 

45 

27,360 

80 

29.378 

62 

29,052 

39 

31,284 

35 

N.  C. 

9,091 

26 

9.602 

2 

11.377 

44 

10,640 

94 

10.562 

56 

s.  c. 

8,972 

29 

7,773 

18 

8.858 

71 

8,043 

58 

9,449 

54 

Ga. 

2,915 

49 

3,351 

38 

3.178 

44 

3,337 

78 

3,107 

37 

Orleans 

729 

54 
5 

542 

25 
93 

703 

26 
43 

2,057 

71 
56 

1,326 

69 

Total 

309,977 

318,189 

387,684 

371,500 

371,114 

12 

The  reader  will  note  that  the  gain  in  the  coasting  trade 
tonnage  was  69,494  45/95.  Every  division  represented  in  the 
above  trade  save  Georgia  showed  an  increase.  The  obvious  con- 
clusion is  that  vessels  formerly  engaged  in  the  foreign  trade 
were  transferred  to  the  coasting  trade.  Over  half  of  this  gain 
was  in  Massachusetts.  The  loss  in  the  foreign  trade  was  43,789 
73/95;  the  gain  in  the  coasting  trade  was  37,911  1/95.  IVIiore- 
over,  the  increase  in  tonnage  of  licensed  vessels  under  twenty 
tons  employed  in  the  coasting  trade  should  be  noted.  This  was 
only  595  52/95  for  Massachusetts,  but  it  amounted  to  2,296 
89/95  for  the  country  as  a  whole. ^°  By  simple  arithmetical  cal- 
culation we  find  then  that  Massachusetts'  loss  was  5,283  20/95, 
and  the  total  loss  for  the  United  States  in  these  two  branches 
was  7,461  87/95.  The  effect  of  the  embargo  on  actual  tonnage 
was  not  striking.  It  is  perfectly  true,  as  Professor  Channing 
points  out,  that  no  self-respecting  shipowner  would  allow  his 
vessel  to  rot  at  the  wharves  in  a  year  or  two.  Moreover,  many 
of  these  vessels  did  not  tie  up  in  American  harbors.  They  stayed 

29  Ibid.,   pp.   439,    440. 

30  Ibid.,    p.    442. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  221 

abroad  during  the  embargo,  engaged  in  coasting  trade,  or  in 
smuggling.  The  embargo,  nevertheless,  decidedly  injured  the 
commerce  by  diverting  capital  to  manufactures,  giving  other 
nations  a  chance  to  win  and  hold  our  markets,  and  by  checking 
ship  construction. 

The  following  figures  show  the  tonnage  built  in  the  United 
States,  1806-1810:  1806,  126,093  29/95;  1807,  99,783  92/95; 
1808,  31,755  34/95;  1809,  91,397  55/95;  1810,  127,575  86/95.31 
The  hard  times  of  the  embargo  caused  less  than  one-third  of  the 
tonnage  to  be  built  in  1808  which  was  constructed  in  1807 ;  the 
partial  repeal  of  the  embargo  caused  the  tonnage  built  in  1809 
to  jump  back  almost  to  the  amount  constructed  in  1807. 

A  mere  recital  of  figures,  however,  will  not  give  a  picture  of 
the  ravaging  effects  of  the  embargo.  Those  effects,  almost  with- 
out exception,  have  been  painted  as  disastrous  by  historians 
since  then,  and  the  writer  of  this  monograph  has  collected 
numerous  quotations  from  secondary  writers  who  support  this 
view,  but  as  in  the  case  of  agriculture,  limitation  of  space  and 
the  uselessness  of  quoting  from  late  writers  when  contemporary 
material  is  at  hand  cause  him  to  pass  them  by  for  the  most  part. 

Prom  the  very  beginning  the  merchants  protested  against 
the  embargo.  On  December  31,  1807,  George  Cabot  wrote  to 
Pickering  from  Boston: 

Already  the  evils  of  the  embargo  begin  to  be  felt,  and  threats  of  vio- 
lence are  whispered.  No  man  can  doubt  that  all  our  commercial  cities 
will  experience  that  degree  of  suffering  which  must  destroy  order  and 
subordination.  Some  thousands  (including  women  and  children)  of  per- 
sona in  this  town  will  be  without  subsistence  in  a  few  days  because  there 
is  no  employment  for  them.  If  the  government  cuts  off  all  the  business 
we  are  pursuing,  they  ought  to  provide  a  substitute  without  delay.  The 
embargo  brings  greater  vtnmediate  distress  on  us  than  war,  though  the 
latter  would  finally  bring  ruin.  .  .  32 

On  January  20,  Cabot  again  wrote  to  Pickering:  ''I  can  truly 
say  I  do  not  know  a  man  of  any  party  who  openly  vindicates 


31  Ibid.,   p.   430. 

32  Lodge,  H.  C,  Life  and  Letters  of  George  Cabot,  p.  374.  This  opposition,  how 
ever,  was  not  universal.  Thus  William  Gray  of  Salem,  Massachusetts,  one  of  the 
greatest  merchants  of  the  period,  upheld  the  measure.  See  Professor  L.  M.  Sear's 
article,  "Philadelphia  and  the  Embargo,"  published  in  the  Quarterly  Journal  of 
Economics,  February,  1921. 


222      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

it  [the  embargo],  though  there  may  be  some  apologists  who 
would  palliate  and  excuse  it.  In  sixty  or  ninety  days  we  shall 
be  in  a  very  unhappy  state,  if  it  continues.  "^^ 

On  January  26,  1808,  William  Plumer  wrote  to  Samuel  R. 
Mitchell,  a  New  York  Congressman: 

Our  merchants  complain  of  the  embargo  as  a  serious  evil;  it  oppresses 
our  seamen,  many  of  whom  are  in  want  of  bread,  and  our  farmers  feel  its 
pressure  in  the  reduced  price  of  the  produce  of  their  lands.  When  Con- 
gress imposed  it,  they  possessed,  I  presume,  information  which  it  was  then 
improper  to  disclose,  but  which,  if  known,  would  have  prevented  prudent 
men  from  hazarding  their  ships  on  the  ocean.  When  from  any  source,  this 
danger  shall  be  known  to  our  merchants,  will  the  embargo  be  continued? 
Or  is  it  designed  to  operate  against  other  nations?  If  the  latter  is  the 
object,  I  fear,  while  we  are  chastising  others  with  whips,  we  shall  be 
scourging  ourselves  with  scorpions.^* 

On  April  5,  Cabot  wrote  again  to  Pickering:  "Although  our 
people  now  begin  to  suffer  very  much  from  the  embargo,  yet  it 
appears  that  other  feelings  are  stronger,  and  other  passions 
govern  them.  .  ."^^  On  January  18,  1809,  Cabot  once  more 
wrote :  ' '  Our  government  ought  to  raise  the  embargo,  and  leave 
commerce  free;  but  this,  they  know  would  offend  France,  and 
therefore  they  refuse  to  do  it.  "^^ 

Many  ships  were  tied  up  in  the  harbors  of  the  country.  On 
April  1,  1808,  there  were  108  ships,  117  brigs  and  71  schooners 
at  New  York.  In  ports  to  the  south  of  New  York  there  were 
123  ships,  140  brigs,  and  150  schooners;  in  ports  east  of  New 
York  there  were  50  ships,  109  brigs,  and  100  schooners.  The 
total  was  thus  281  ships,  366  brigs,  and  321  schooners.  The 
number  of  men  thrown  out  of  the  foreign  trade  was  then  com- 
puted at  8712,  or  nine  for  each  boat.^^ 

On  September  1,  1808,  29  Boston-owned  ships,  31  brigs,  and 
11  schooners,  exclusive  of  coasters  were  embargoed  in  that  city. 
Of  the  total  tonnage  of  13,514,  the  Federalists  owned  8,509,  the 
Democrats  3,715,  and  1,020  was  doubtful.  These  vessels  would 
have  employed  six  hundred  seamen  and  were  estimated  to  be 


33  Lodge,  H.  C,  Life  and  Letters  of  George  Cabot,  p.  376. 

34  Plumer,   William,   Life   of   William  Plumer,   pp.    364,   365. 

35  Lodge,  H.  C,  Life  and  Letters  of  George  Cabot,  p.   391. 

36  Ibid.,   p.   406. 

37  Paulson's  American  Daily  Advertiser,  April   12,   1808. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809 


223 


worth  at  least  at  half  million  dollars.^®  The  following  signifi- 
cant extract,  which  pictures  roughly  the  conditions  of  prac- 
tically all  the  seaports  of  the  country,  is  taken  from  the  Amer- 
ican Register: 

On  the  first  day  of  January,  1809,  there  were  lying  in  the  ports  and 
harbours  here  mentioned,  the  following  large  quantities  of  shipping;  the 
principal  part  of  which  are  totally  dismantled,  having  been  deprived  of 
their  usual  channels  of  trade  by  the  embargo: 


Boston 

Charleston 

Salem 

New  Bedford 

81  ships 

13  ships 

53  ships 

57  ships 

92  brigs 

10  brigs 

35  brigs 

23  brigs 

79  schooners 

17  schooners 

58  schooners 

27  schooners 

61  sloops 

....  sloops 

19  sloops 

sloops,   and 

a  gunboat 

313 

40 

165 

107 

Total  62539 

The  same  magazine  declared  that  on  February  21,  1809,  there 
were  in  the  port  of  Philadelphia  and  at  the  point  142  ships,  92 
brigs,  and  59  schooners,  or  a  total  of  293.  In  addition  to  these 
there  were  about  fifteen  or  twenty  coasters, ■*" 

Newspapers  naturally  commented  on  the  harmful  effects  of 
the  embargo  on  our  merchants.  Bankruptcies  were  frequent. 
Flour  at  New  York,  Alexandria,  Baltimore  and  other  places  fell 
to  four  and  four  and  one-fourth  dollars  per  barrel.  Several 
failures  took  place.  One  failure  in  New  York  was  said  to  be 
for  $804,000.  American  credit  was  damaged,  though  the  em- 
bargo could  not  have  been  responsible  for  a  Liverpool  house 
protesting  40,000  sterling  in  one  day."*^ 

English  papers  charged  the  American  government  with  allow- 
ing vessels  to  sail  for  England  in  order  to  save  the  American 
credit.  The  editor  of  the  National  Intelligencer  denied  the  state- 
ment, but  lamented  the  fact  that  embargo  violations  were  so 
frequent  as  to  give  rise  to  the  supposition.^^ 

A  Utica  item,  dated  April  12,  declared: 


38  Boston  Gazette,   September  1,   1808. 
.'i9  American  Register,  Vol.  V,   p.  217. 

40  Ibid.,    p.    233. 

41  Boston   Gazette,  January  4,   1808. 

42  iYah'o7i«I    Intelligencer,    April    14,    1808. 


224      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

We  have  just  seen  a  list  of  failures  of  the  merchants  in  the  city  of 
New  York,  which  have  taken  place  in  consequence  of  the  Embargo,  amount- 
ing to  ninety-one  in  number  for  the  enormous  sum  of  six  millions  five 
hundred  and  five  thousand  dollars.  We  also  learn  that  the  Albany  shippers 
have  returned,  with  their  cargoes  from  New  York,  not  being  able  to  sell 
one  cent's  worth  of  their  produce.43 

John  Howe,  the  secret  agent  of  the  British  government,  ad- 
dressed numerous  letters  to  Sir  George  Prevost  on  commerce 
and  the  state  of  the  country.     On  May  5,  1808,  he  wrote: 

In  proportion,  however,  to  this  appearance  of  wealth  and  prosperity, 
is  the  state  of  suffering  they  are  at  present  reduced  to.  Before  the 
Embargo,  not  a  House  or  Store  remained  long  unoccupied  in  this  town. 
It  is  now  computed  that  there  are  at  least  500  Stores  and  Houses  to  let, 
as  the  late  occupiers  of  them  have  been  either  obliged  to  go  into  the 
country,  or  to  turn  their  attention  to  other  pursuits,  than  those  they  were 
engaged  in  for  support.  Wharves  where  immense  bustle  were  visible 
before  are  in  a  manner  departed.  Tradesmen  particularly  those  whose  em- 
ployments depended  on  shipping,  are  suffering  very  severely.  All  descrip- 
tions of  the  country  are  more  or  less  effected,  and  you  scarcely  meet  a 
person  who  is  not  complaining ;  and  yet  they  appear  to  endure  it  with 
a  degree  of  philosophy  that  is  really  surprising  in  a  country  where  the  ac- 
tions of  men  are  under  so  little  restraint  .44 

Howe  then  declared  that  there  was  great  suffering  and  numer- 
ous bankruptcies  in  New  York,  but  only  three  or  four  small 
failures  in  Boston.  British  goods  in  Boston,  however,  were 
rising  ten  to  twenty  per  cent.  Portland,  formerly  Casco  Bay, 
he  said,  had  enjoyed  an  extensive  lumber  trade  with  Liverpool 
and  an  extensive  fish  and  lumber  trade  with  the  West  Indies. 
The  city  had  gone  to  the  extent  of  its  credit  and  capital.  The 
embargo  had  paralyzed  its  efforts  and  involved  its  merchants 
with  few  exceptions  in  bankruptcy.  All  the  commercial  towns 
of  the  state  were  injured  by  the  embargo,  but  none  so  much  as 
Portland.  With  regard  to  Marblehead,  he  declared  that  the  ex- 
tensive fishery  was  at  a  standstill  and  the  vessels  usually  em- 
ployed in  it  were  lying  useless  in  port.  Apparently,  the  effect 
of  the  embargo  was  not  then  so  marked  on  Salem.*^ 

On  August  5,  Howe  wrote  from  New  York  concerning  a  south- 
ern trip  and  the  effects  of  the  embargo.    Baltimore  and  Alexan- 


43  New  England  Palladium,  April  26,   1808. 

44  "Secret  Reports  of  John  Howe,"  American  Historical  Review,  Vol.  XVII,  p.  79. 

45  Ibid.,   p.    82. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  225 

dria  were  the  principal  cities  described.  He  declared  that  the 
latter  was  suffering  from  the  prosperity  of  the  former,  and 
particularly  from  the  embargo.  Mr.  Patten,  the  British  con- 
sul, told  him,  and  he  found  it  true  by  observation,  that  there 
were  hardly  twenty  seamen  in  the  place,  and  if  the  embargo 
were  removed,  it  would  take  quite  a  while  to  collect  seamen  to 
man  the  vessels  lying  idle  by  the  wharves.*^ 

The  classic  example  given  of  the  effects  of  the  embargo  is 
taken  from  the  writings  of  John  Lambert.  "While  describing 
his  visit  to  New  York  in  November,  1807,  he  referred  to  cotton, 
wool,  and  merchandise;  barrels  of  potash,  rice,  flour,  and  salt 
provisions;  hogsheads  of  sugar,  chests  of  tea,  puncheons  of  rum, 
and  pipes  of  wine,  boxes,  cases,  packs  and  packages  of  all  sizes 
and  kinds  scattered  on  the  wharfs,  landing  places,  or  decks  of 
shipping.  He  mertioned  also  the  busy  carters,  merchants, 
auctioneers,  and  coffee-houses. 

The  coffee-house  slip,  [he  said]  and  the  comers  of  Wall  and  Pearl  streets 
were  jammed  up  with  carts,  drays  and  wheelbarrows;  horses  and  men  were 
huddled  promiscuously  together  leaving  little  or  no  room  for  passengers 
to  pass.  Such  was  the  appearances  of  this  part  of  the  town  when  I  ar- 
rived. Everything  was  in  motion;  all  was  life,  bustle,  and  activity.  The 
people  were  scampering  in  all  directions  to  trade  with  each  other,  and  to 
ship  off  their  purchases  for  the  European,  Asian,  African,  and  West  Indian 
markets.  Every  thought,  word,  look,  and  action  of  the  multitude  seemed 
to  be  absorbed  by  commerce;  the  welkin  rang  with  its  busy  hum,  and  all 
were  eager  in  the  pursuit  of  its  riches.*^ 

Lambert  returned  to  New  York  in  April,  after  the  embargo 
had  been  in  operation  about  four  months.  He  found  the  wharves 
deserted,  the  shipping  dismantled  and  laid  up,  boxes,  bales, 
casks,  barrels  and  packages  absent  from  the  wharves,  few  count- 
ing houses  open,  and  a  few  solitary  merchants,  clerks,  porters, 
and  laborers  walking  about  with  their  hands  in  their  pockets. 
Instead  of  sixty  or  a  hundred  carts,  he  found  hardly  a  dozen 
and  they  were  unemployed.  The  coffee-house  was  almost  empty, 
the  streets  by  the  waterside  were  almost  deserted,  and  grass  had 
begun  to  grow  on  the  wharves. 

In  short,  [  he  concluded],  the  scene  was  so  gloom  and  forlorn,  that 
had  it  been  the  month  of  September  instead  of  April,  I  should  verily  have 


46  Ibid.,    pp.    96-98. 

47  Lambert,    John,    Travels,   Vol.    ii,    pp.    63,    64. 


226      lOAYA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

thought  that  a  malignant  fever  was  raging  in  the  place;  so  desolating 
were  the  effects  of  the  embargo,  which  in  the  short  space  of  five  months 
had  deprived  the  first  commercial  city  in  the  States  of  all  its  life,  bustle, 
and  activity;  caused  above  one  hundred  and  twenty  bankruptcies;  and 
completely  annihilated  its  foreign  commerce.^s 

Lambert  declared  that  he  found  the  charge  commonly  assert- 
ed that  Jefferson's  object  in  laying  an  embargo  on  shipping  was 
to  annihilate  the  commerce  of  the  northern  states  and  reduce 
the  merchants  and  traders  to  farmers.  With  regard  to  this,  he 
said: 

How  this  charge  can  be  reconciled  with  Mr.  Jefferson's  known  sentiments 
and  actions  during  his  administration  I  cannot  easily  perceive.  It  is  well 
known  that  the  flourishing  state  of  the  treasury  for  the  eight  years  which 
he  was  in  power  was  occasioned  solely  by  commerce.  Why,  therefore,  he 
or  his  successor  Mr.  Madison  (who  follows  in  his  steps)  should  wish  to 
annihilate  such  an  easy,  agreeable,  and  popular  source  of  revenue,  is  surely 
unaccountable;  but  that  the  nation  should  quietly  submit  to  such  proceed- 
ing would  indeed  be  passing  strange.  The  embargo,  while  it  lasts,  cer- 
tainly annihilates  every  branch  of  foreign  commerce  carried  on  by  the 
State;  but  it  cannot  be  argued  from  thence  that  Mr.  Jefferson  or  Mr. 
Madison  aims  at  the  total  destruction  of  commerce.  It  has  no  doubt  been 
the  source  of  much  altercation  with  the  belligerents,  but  the  United  States 
still  continued  to  prosper;  and  though  the  merchants  and  the  government 
grumbled,  and  vociferated  their  complaints  against  the  English  and  French 
outrages,  still  they  filled  their  pockets  and  their  treasury.49 

In  a  further  discussion  of  this  subject,  Lambert  declared  that 
if  Jefferson's  sole  object  had  been  the  destruction  of  commerce, 
the  embargo  would  not  have  been  approved  by  so  many  mer- 
chants. Though  they  might  find  pleasure  in  revenging  them- 
selves on  Great  Britain,  whose  manufactures  and  commerce 
were  "materially  affected,"  he  argued,  it  would  be  supposing 
more  than  Roman  virtue  "to  believe  them  capable  of  sacrificing 
their  best  interests  merely  to  annoy  their  political  opponents, 
their  own  countrymen  too!"  He  said  that  every  merchant  now 
supporting  the  administration  measures  of  Jefferson  and  Madi- 
son, if  asked  concerning  his  willingness  to  give  up  commerce 
forever  "to  further  Mr.  Jefferson's  plans  for  making  the  United 
States  a  Chinese  nation/'  would  reply  in  the  negative.  "Mr. 
Jefferson's  great  object,"  he  concluded,  "is  to  encourage  the 

48  Ibid.,  p.   65.  gti 

49  Ibid.,   p.    365. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  227 

agricultural  interests  of  his  country  in  preference  to  commerce 
and  manufacture.  .  ."^'^ 

David  Ramsay,  a  friend  of  the  administration,  attributed  the 
losses  of  commerce  to  the  belligerent  powers.    He  said: 

The  citizens  of  Carolina,  conscious  that  they  had  given  no  just  cause  of 
offense  to  either,  humbly  hoped  to  be  permitted  to  live  in  peace.  But 
this  boon  was  too  great  to  be  granted.  Each  of  the  nations  at  war  en- 
deavored to  goad  them  into  a  quarrel  with  its  respective  adversary;  and 
to  compel  them  to  do  so,  each  hostile  nation  interdicted  them  and  all 
Americans  from  trading  with  the  other,  and  all  its  dependencies ;  thereby 
shutting  them  out  from  nine-tenths  of  the  ports  with  which,  by  the  law  of 
nations,  and  of  nature's  God,  they  had  a  right  to  trade.si 

With  the  enactment  of  the  embargo  act,  he  continued : 

Coasting  trade  is  all  that  throughout  the  year  1808  remained  of  an  ex- 
tensive commerce,  which,  though  not  two  centuries  old,  had  grown  with 
such  unexampled  rapidity  as  to  be  second  in  the  world.  That  year,  which 
will  be  long  remembered  for  the  privations  and  sufferings  resulting  from  a 
general  embargo,  was  an  eventful  one,  to  the  inhabitants  of  South  Carolina. 
Their  foreign  trade  was  in  a  moment,  and  with  little  or  no  previous  notice 
completely  arrested.52 

John  Bristed,  also  a  contemporary,  pictured  graphically  the 
effects  of  the  embargo  policy  in  his  book,  published  at  London 
in  1818: 

These  'restrictive  energies'  (as  they  were  vauntingly  called  by  Mr. 
Jefferson)  not  only  annihilated  the  foreign  commerce,  but  also  very  ma- 
terially crippled  the  coasting  trade  of  the  United  States.  The  distress, 
misery,  and  ruin,  produced  by  this  great  agricultural  scheme,  not  merely 
to  the  merchants,  but  to  the  farmers  also  (whose  interests,  it  professed  to 
subserve,  but  whose  property  it  destroyed  by  taking  away  the  markets  for 
their  produce),  was  so  general,  so  deep,  so  intolerable,  as  to  prove  the 
entire  fallacy  of  the  theory.  .  .  ss 

As  previously  indicated,  numerous  references  might  easily  be 
made  to  secondary  writers,  but  no  writer  whose  book  was  pub- 
lished later  than  1868  will  be  referred  to  here.  There  are  vari- 
ous reasons  for  this.  The  early  w^riters  often  knew  the  effects 
of  the  embargo  from  actual  observation.    All  of  them,  it  is  to  be 


50  Ibid.,    pp.    366-367. 

51  History  of  South  Carolina,  Vol.  ii,  p.  135. 

52  Ibid.,   p.    135. 

53  America  and  Her  Resources,  p.   37.     See  also  pp.  42,  43. 


228        IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

presumed,  talked  with  people  who  lived  in  embargo  times.  Eater 
writers  obtained  their  material  from  the  earlier  writers,  and 
their  conclusions  are  generally  the  same. 

E.  Everett,  writing  in  the  North  American  Review,  in  1826, 
declared  that  the  embargo  operated  so  severely  on  the  com- 
mercial and  agricultural  interests  and  was  so  ineffectual  as  an 
instrument  of  coercion  on  foreign  powers  that  it  was  repealed 
by  law,  on  ]\£arch  1,  1809,  with  regard  to  all  countries  save 
England  and  France.^* 

Richard  Hildreth,  in  referring  to  the  passage  of  the  embargo 
and  its  effects,  spoke  of  the  encouragement  of  manufactures,  the 
sowing  and  reaping  of  the  farmers  in  hopes  of  better  times,  the 
storing  of  cotton  and  tobacco  by  the  planters,  the  slight  cur- 
tailment of  imported  luxuries  through  inability  to  buy,  and  then 
declared  that  a  different  state  of  things  prevailed  in  New  Eng- 
land, where  there  was  much  suffering  and  a  prevalent  belief 
that  the  administration  acted  as  tools  of  France.  With  some 
feeling  he  declared: 

The  intrepid  seamen,  the  adventurous  and  sagacious  merchants,  whose 
enterprise,  in  the  course  of  fifteen  years,  had  carried  the  flag  of  the  United 
States  to  every  corner  of  the  globe ;  the  men,  who,  notwithstanding  con- 
stant belligerent  interruptions  and  depredations,  had  raised  their  country 
to  be  the  second  commercial  nation  in  the  world,  with  a  prospect  of  soon 
becoming  the  first — as  they  paced  with  melancholy  steps  the  late  busy 
streets  in  which  grass  was  beginning  to  grow,  and  saw  their  good  ships 
made  to  traverse  the  ocean,  gloomily  rotting  at  the  wharves,  cursed  with 
vehement  and  bitter  emphasis  the  stubborn  folly  of  a  pusillanimous  govern- 
ment, which  refused  to  the  merchant  and  the  sailor  even  the  boon  of  taking 
their  own  risks  and  defending  themselves;  at  the  same  time  pompously 
pretending  that  this  timid  if  not  treacherous  abandonment  of  the  ocean 
was  a  dignified  maintenance  of  maritime  rights.^s 

T.  C.  Amory,  who  based  his  statements  perhaps  too  exclusive- 
ly on  the  writings  of  James  Sullivan,  declared: 

Not  many  months  elapsed  after  the  passage  of  the  embargo  before 
New  England  began  to  experience  all  its  deplorable  consequences.  .  .  Com- 
mercial adventure,  carefully  planned  and  rich  in  promise,  had  been  stayed 
in  the  midst  of  preparation.  The  ships,  which  had  whitened  the  ocean, 
rotted  at  the  wharves.  Valuable  merchandise  perishable  by  nature,  decayed 
in  the  store-house.    Merchants,  who  had  grown  old  in  successful  enterprise, 


54  North  American   Review,   Vol.   23,   p.    391. 

55  Jlistonj   of   the    United   States,   Vol.    vi,    pp.    Ill,    112. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  229 

reduced  to  the  verge  of  bankruptcy,  unexpectedly  found  their  families 
threatened  with  poverty,  and  their  names  with  a  discredit  which  commercial 
honor  dreaded  more  than  impoverishment.  Before  the  embargo  was  raised, 
four-fifths  of  our  commercial  classes,  according  to  tradition,  became  in- 
solvent; and  many  of  them,  no  bankrupt  law  existing,  were  unable  to  ex- 
tricate themselves  from  their  embarrassments,  and  passed  the  rest  of  their 
days  in  want  and  humiliation. 

Those  who  relied  upon  the  prosperitj'  of  trade  for  daily  toil  and  sub- 
sistence were  thrown  out  of  emplojTnent;  and  charity,  deprived  of  it?, 
ordinary  resources,  furnished  inadequate  relief  to  the  numerous  applicants. 
Luxuries  from  abroad,  which  from  habit  were  indispensable  to  the  aged 
and  feeble,  rose  rapidly  above  the  straitened  means  on  which  they  depended. 
Real  estate  rapidly  depreciated,  grass  grew  amid  the  pavements  of  populous 
seaports,  and  the  inhabitants,  too  disconsolate  to  be  amused,  passed  their 
idle  days  in  profitless  regrets,  or  in  angry  vituperation  at  the  originators 
of  this  wide-spread  calamity.56 

E.  H.  Derby,  a  writer  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly  for  1861,  also 
painted  gloomy  scenes  of  the  effects  of  the  embargo.^®  H.  A. 
Garland  described  the  effect  of  the  embargo  in  this  language : 

An  embargo  is  the  most  heroic  remedy  that  can  be  applied  to 
state  diseases.  It  must  soon  run  its  course,  and  kill  or  cure  in  a  short 
time.  It  is  like  one  holding  his  breath  to  rush  through  flame  or  mephitic 
gas:  the  suspension  may  be  endured  for  a  short  time,  but  the  lungs  at 
length  must  be  inflated,  even  at  the  hazard  of  suffocation.  Commerce  is 
the  breath  that  fills  the  lungs  of  a  nation,  and  a  total  suspension  of  it 
is  like  taking  away  vital  air  from  the  human  system;  convulsions  or  doatli 
must  soon  follow.  By  the  embargo,  the  farmer,  the  merchant,  the  mechanic, 
the  capitalist,  the  ship  owner,  the  sailor,  and  the  day-laborer,  found 
themselves  suddenly  arrested  in  their  daily  business.  Crops  were  left  to 
rot  in  the  ware  houses;  ships  in  the  docks;  capital  was  compelled  to  seek 
new  channels  for  investment,  while  labor  was  driven  to  every  shift  to 
keep  from  starvation. ^s 

Edmund  Quiney,  son  of  Josiah  Quincy,  one  of  the  characters 
in  embargo  times,  is  the  only  other  writer  who  will  be  quoted. 
Naturally  the  views  of  the  son  were  strongh^  colored  by  the 
words  of  his  father,  Avhich  have  been  frequently  quoted  in 
earlier  chapters.     Edmund  Quincy  wrote  that  the  embargo 

was  the  nightmare  of  the  New  England  States,  which  chilled  the  life 
blood  of  their  industry,  and  checked  its  vital  current  with  hopeless  torpor. 


56  Amory,  T.   C,   Life   of  James  SuUian    wilh  Selections  from   his   Writings,  Vol.   ii, 
pp.    292,    293. 

57  Atlantic   Monthly,    Vol.    vii,    p.    726. 

58  Oarlnnd,   H    A.,   The   Life   of  John  Randolph   of  Roanoke,   p.   267. 


230      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

It  pressed  upon  all  classes,  paralyzing  at  once  the  capital  of  the  rich  and 
the  day  labor  of  the  poor.  Ships  rotted  at  the  wharves;  handicrafts  and 
industries  dependent  upon  commerce  perished  with  it;  agriculture  felt  the 
general  distress  in  the  diminished  demand  for  its  productions;  all  trades 
and  occupations  suffered  by  sympathy  with  the  destruction  of  the  chief 
source  of  wealth  and  prosperity.  The  shadow  of  the  Embargo  fell  upon 
every  household,  and  darkened  every  fireside.''^ 

The  oppressive  effects  of  the  Embargo,  [Quincy  later  added  with  more 
warmth,  perhaps,  than  veracity,]  were  not  confined  to  the  Northern  States, 
as  its  Southern  supporters  had  supposed  they  would  be.  It  recoiled  on 
the  grain  raising  and  planting  States  so  as  to  make  itself  severely  felt  by 
them.  This  was  particularly  the  case  with  the  Southern  Atlantic  States, — 
the  cotton  growing,  rice  planting,  and  tobacco-raising  districts,  which 
largely  depended  for  their  gains  on  an  unrestricted  trade.oo 

It  is  not  the  purpose  of  the  writer  to  estimate  the  money  cost 
of  the  embargo,  for  that  can  never  be  definitely  known.  A  few 
conflicting  citations  should  make  that  clear.  After  six  months 
the  loss  was  computed  by  the  Carlisle  Herald  and  the  New  Eng- 
land Palladium  at  forty-eight  million  dollars.^^  J.  A.  Bayard 
of  Delaware  declared  in  the  Senate  on  February  14,  1809,  that 
the  national  treasury  had  lost  at  least  fifteen  million  dollars  and 
the  country  not  less  than  forty  as  the  result  of  the  embargo.''^ 
Some  other  embargo  opponents,  as  Livermore  of  Massachusetts, 
speaking  before  a  year  of  restriction  had  passed,  estimated  the 
annual  loss  as  high  as  a  hundred  or  a  hundred  and  fifty  million 
dollars.^^  The  lower  estimates  quoted  are  probably  nearer  the 
truth.  The  cost  of  war  was  also  very  high.  Both  war  and  em- 
bargo costs  ran  far  up  into  the  millions,  but  neither  can  be 
accurately  determined.  When  war  did  come,  the  same  effects 
were  apparent — stimulation  to  manufacturers,  hindrance  to 
agriculture,  and  ruin  of  commerce.  It  may  be  noted,  however, 
that  in  every  year  of  the  War  of  1812  save  one  (1814),  the 
value  of  the  exports  from  the  United  States  was  greater  than 
in  1808.  In  1814  they  sank  to  $6,927,441,  or  about  a  third  of 
the  $22,430,960  in   1808.«*     Opponents  of  the  embargo  main- 

59  Life  of  Josiah  Quincy  of  Mass.  by  his  son  Edmund  Quincy,  p.  138. 

60  Ibid.,    p.    140. 

61  New   England   Palladium,   July   5,    1808. 

62  Annals  of  Congress,  Vol.   19,   p.  404. 

63  Ibid.,    Vol.    18,    pp.    1850-1852. 

64  Pitkin,  Timothy,  Statistical  View,  pp.   36,   37. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  231 

tained,  in  many  cases,  that  the  measure  was  more  costly  than 
war  would  have  been ;  friends  of  the  embargo  generally  denied 
the  statement.  Even  if  the  matter  were  susceptible  of  proof, 
questions  might  be  raised  with  regard  to  the  cost  and  chances 
of  success  of  a  war  in  1808  as  compared  with  1812.  The  writer 
accordingly  left  out  idle  speculation  on  relative  costs  and  tried 
in  the  main  to  determine  how  manufactures,  agriculture,  and 
commerce  were  affected.  ^ 

In  summary,  it  may  be  noted  that  the  embargo  effects  showed 
a  blending  of  good  and  evil.  The  demand  for  American  manu- 
factured goods  increased,  for,  with  the  curtailment  of  foreign 
trade,  many  of  our  citizens  had  to  buy  at  home  or  do  without. 
Capital  was  accordingly  transferred  from  commerce  to  manu- 
factures. Unemployed  sailors  and  fishermen  frequently  entered 
factories,  or  helped  erect  industrial  plants  or  houses.  Thus 
manufactures  gained.  The  price  paid,  however,  was  too  heavy 
a  one.  Many  of  the  unemployed  marines  emigrated  to  Canada 
or  took  service  under  a  foreign  flag;  many  of  those  who  re- 
mained at  home  merely  swelled  our  charity  or  prison  popula- 
tion. Without  work  and  worried  by  the  suffering  of  relatives, 
many  undoubtedly  entered  a  life  of  crime.  Farmers  in  general 
suffered  greatly,  for  with  the  foreign  market  gone  and  crops 
accumulating,  agricultural  products  fell  in  value  and  with  them 
went  the  land  and  slaves.  With  products  well  nigh  unsalable 
and  capital  tied  up  in  machinery,  land,  and  permanent  improve- 
ments, farmers  could  not  readily  turn  to  manufacturing.  Many 
had  gone  into  debt  for  their  farms  in  the  expectation  that  the 
proceeds  of  crops  sold  at  the  usual  high  prices  would  clear 
them  of  all  indebtedness  in  a  few  short  years,  but  naturally 
many  lost  their  mortgaged  farms.  Though  many  a  smuggler 
made  a  fortune  through  dishonesty,  many  a  law-abiding  mer- 
chant went  bankrupt.  Many  thriving  ports  groaned  uneasily 
under  the  blasting  effects  of  the  embargo;  many  involuntarily 
idle  sailors  and  fishermen  cursed  with  quiet  or  noisy  vehemence 
while  their  families  endured  the  agonies  of  hunger.  Commerce, 
however,  was  not  annihilated,  though  it  was  grievously  injured. 

If,  in  conclusion,  the  effects  of  the  embargo  on  industry  can 
be  epitomized  in  one  final  sentence,  that  sentence  will  read : 
"The  embargo  stimulated  manufactures,  injured  agriculture, 
and  prostrated  commerce." 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

I.     BIOGRAPHICAL  SKETCHES  AND  CORRESPONDENCE 

Adams,  Henry,  Life  of  Albert  Gallatin.     Philadelphia,  1879. 

Amory,  T.  C,  Life  of  James  Sullivan  with  Selections  from  his  Writings. 
(2  vols.)   Boston,  1859. 

Anderson,  D.  R.,  William  Branch  Giles;  A  Study  in  the  Politics  of  Virginia, 
and  the  Nation  from  1790  to  1830.     Menasha   (Wisconsin),  1914. 

Baldwin,  J.  G.,  Party  Leaders;  Sketches  of  Thomas  Jefferson,  Alexander 
Hamilton,  Andrew  JacTcson,  Henry  Clay,  John  Bandolph  of  Eoanoke, 
including  Notices  of  Many  Other  American  Statesmen.    New  York,  1856. 

Garland,  H.  A.,  The  Life  of  John  Bandolph  of  Boanoke.    New  York,  1866. 

Gay,  S.  H.,  James  Madison.     Boston,  1884. 

Graydon,  Alexander,  Memoirs  of  a  Life.     Harrisburg,  1811. 

Hamilton,  J.  C,  Life  of  Alexander  Hamilton.  A  History  of  the  Bepublio 
of  the  United  States  of  America,  as  traced  in  His  Writings  and  in  Those 
of  His  Contemporaries.      (7  vols.)   Boston,  1879. 

Humphreys,  F.  L.,  Life  and  Times  of  David  Huinphreys  Soldier-Statesman- 
Poet.     New  York,  1917. 

Hunt,  Gaillard,  The  Life  of  James  Madison.  New  York,  1902. 

Jay,  William,  The  Life  of  John  Jay;  with  Selections  from  His  Corres- 
pondence and  Miscellaneous  Papers  (2  vols.)  New  York,  1833. 

King,  C.  R.,  Life  and  Correspondence  of  Bufxis  King.  (6  vols.)  New  York, 
1898. 

Lodge,  H.  C,  Life  and  Letters  of  George  Cabot.  Boston,  1878. 

Morison,  S.  E.,  The  Life  and  Letters  of  Harrison  Gray  Otis,  Federalist, 
1765-1848.  (2  vols.)  Boston,  1913. 

Morse,  J.  T.,  Thomas  Jefferson.  Boston,  1888. 

Muzzey,  D.  S.,  Thomas  Jefferson.  New  York,  1918. 

Plumer,  William,  Life  of  William  Plumer.  Boston,  1857. 

Quincy,  Edmund,  Life  of  Josiah  Quincy.  Boston,  1868. 

Randall,  H.  S.,  The  Life  of  Thomas  Jefferson.  (3  vols.)  Philadelphia,  1871. 

Steiner,  B.  C,  The  Life  and  Correspondence  of  James  McHenry,  Secretary 
of  War  under  Washington  and  Adams.  Cleveland,  1907. 

Stevens,  J.  A.,  Albert  Gallatin.  Boston,  1883. 

Story,  W.  W.,  Life  and  Letters  of  Joseph  Story.  Boston,  1851. 

Sullivan,  William,  Familiar  Letters  on  Public  Characters  and  Events  from 
the  Peace  of  1783  to  the  Peace  of  1815.     Boston,  1834. 

Upham,  C.  W.,  The  Life  of  Timothy  Pickering.  Boston,  1873. 

Watson,  T.  E.,  The  Life  and  Times  of  Thomas  Jefferson.  New  York,  1913 

Wheaton,  Henry,  Life  of  William  Pinckney  (Library  of  American  Bio- 
graphy, Vol.  VI.  Conducted  by  Jared  Sparks).  Boston,  1839. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  233 

Writmgs  of  John  Quincy  Adams,  (Ford  Edition,  7  vols.)  New  York,  1914. 
Writings  of  Albert  Gallatin,  (Adams  Edition,  3  vols.)  Philadelphia,  1879. 
Writings  of  Thomas  Jefferson,   (Ford  Edition,  10  vols.)   New  York,  1894- 

1899. 
Writings  of  James  Madison,   (Hunt  Edition,  9  vols.)   New  York,  1908. 

II.    NATIONAL,  STATE,  AND  CITY  HISTORIES. 

Adams,  Henry,  History  of  the  United  States.     (9  vols.)  New  York,  1890. 
Alexander,  D.  S.,  A  Political  History  of  the  State  of  New  York.  (3  vols.) 

New  York,   1906. 
Ambler,  C.  H.,  Sectionalism  in  Virginia.     Chicago,  1910. 
Channing,  E.,  A  History  of  the  United  States.   (In  progress)   New  York, 

1917. 
Channing,  E.,  The  Jcffersonian  System  (American  Nation  Series,  Vol.  12). 

New  York,  1906. 
Field,  Edward,  State  of  Bhode  Island  and  Providence  Plantations  at  the 

End  of  the  Century;  a  History,   (3  vols.)   Boston,  1902. 
Garner,  J.  W.  and  Lodge,  H.  C,  The  History  of  the  United  States.  (4  vols.) 

Philadelphia,   1896. 
Hildreth,  Richard,  The  History  of  the  United  States  of  America.  (6  vols.) 

New  York,  1852. 
Hoist,  H.  von..  Constitutional  and  Political  History  of  the  United  States. 
(7  vols.)     Chicago,  1889. 
Lamb,  Mrs.  M.  J.,  History  of  the  City  of  New  York,  (2  vols.)  New  York, 

1877. 
Lodge,  H.  C,  Historic  Toivns.     Boston,  London,  1891. 
McMaster,  J.  B.,  A  History  of  the  People  of  the  United  States,  from  the 

Revolution  to  the  Civil   War.    (6  vols.)    New  York,  1892. 
Muzzey,  D.  S.,  An  American  History.  Boston,  1911. 

Patton,  J.  H.,   The  History   of  the   United  States  of  America,  from  the 
Discovery  of  the  Continent  to   the  Close  of  the   Thirty-sixth  Congress. 
New  York,   1863. 
Ramsay,    David,   History   of   South   Carolina.    (2   vols.)    Newberry    (South 

Carolina),  1858. 
Robinson,  J.  H.  and  Beard,  C.  A.,  The  Development  of  Modern  Europe. 

(2  vols.)    Boston,  1907. 
Scharf,  J.  T.  and  Westcott,  Thompson,  History  of  Philadelphia,  1609-1884. 

(3  vols.)   Philadelphia,  1884. 
Schouler,  James,  History  of  the  United  States  under  the  Constitution.   (6 

vols.)   New  York,  1894. 
Stackpole,  E.  S.,  History  of  New  Hampshire.  (4  vols.)  New  York,  1916. 
Walker,  F.  A.,  The  Making  of  the  Nation.     Boston,  1895. 
Wilson,  J.  G.,  The  Memorial  History  of  the  City  of  New  York.   (4  vols.) 
(Stevens,  J.  A.,  Neio   York  in  the  Second   War  of  Independence,  and 
Todd,  C.  B.,  The  Beginnings  of  Steam  Navigation).     New  York,  1893. 


234      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

Wilson,  Woodrow,  A  History  of  the  American  People.  (5  vols.)  New  York, 
1902. 

III.     SPECIAL  HISTORIES 

Bates,  W.  W.,  American  Navigation.   The  Political  History   of  Its  Bise 

and  Buin  and  the  Proper  Means  for  Its  Encouragement.    Boston,  1906. 
Bishop,  J.  L.,  A  History  of  American  Manufactures  from  1608  to  1860. 

(3  vols.)  Philadelphia,  1866. 
Bogart,  E.  L.,  Economic  History  of  the  United  States.    New  York,  1910. 
BoUes,  A.  S.,  Industrial  History  of  the  United  States.  Norwich,  1879. 
Brewer,  W.  H.,  Cereal  Production  (Tenth  Census,  Vol.  III).  Washington, 

1883. 
Bristed,  John,  America  and  Her  Besources.     London,  1818. 
Clark,  V.  S.,  History  of  Manufactures  in  the   United  States,  1607-1860. 

Washington,  1916. 
Coman,  K.,  Industrial  History  of  the  United  States.     New  York,  1905. 
Day,  Clive,  A  History  of  Commerce.     New  York,   1908. 
Depew,  C.  M.,  (editor).  One  Hundred  Years  of  American  Commerce.     New 

York,  1896. 
Dodge,  J.  R.,  Manufacture  and  Movement  of  Tobacco  (Tenth  Census,  Vol. 

III).     Washington,  1883. 
Fish,  C.  R.,  American  Diploinacy.     New  York,  1915. 
Johnson,  E.  R.  (editor).  History  of  Domestic  and  Foreign  Commerce  of  the 

United  States.     (2  vols.)  Washington,  1915. 
Labour  Department's  Beport  on  Wholesale  and  Betail  Prices  in  the  United 

Kingdom  in  1902,  with  Comparative  Statistical  Tables  for  a  Series  of 

Years.     London,  1903. 
Lippincott,  Isaac,  Economic  Development  of  the  United  States.  New  York, 

1921. 
Lossing,  B.  J.,  History  of  American  Industries  and  Arts.     Philadelphia, 

1876  or  1878   (?). 
MacGregor,  John,  The  Progress  of  America.  (2  vols.)  London,  1847. 
Marvin,  W.  L.,  The  American  Merchant  Marine,  Its  History  and  Bomance 

from  1620  to  1902.     New  York,  1902. 
Pitkin,  Timothy,  A  Statistical  View  of  the  Commerce  of  the  United  States 

of  America;  its  Connection  ivith  Agriculture  and  Manufactures.     Hart- 
ford, 1817. 
Stanwood,     Edward,    A    History    of    the   Presidency   from   1788   to    1917 

(2  vols.)  Boston,  1898-1917. 
Thompson,  C.  M.,  History  of  the  United  States — Political,  Industrial  and 

Social.     Chicago,   1917. 
Tooke,  Thomas,  A  History  of  Prices,  and  of  the  State  of  the  Circulation 

from  1793  to  1837.    (6  vols.)   London,  1838. 
Warden,  D.  B.,  Statistical,  Political,  and  Historical  Account  of  the  United 

States  of  North  America.  (3  vols.)  Edinburgh,  1819. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  235 

Wells,  D.  A.,  Progress  in  Manufactures  {The  First  Century  of  the  Bepuh- 
lic:  A  Eeview  of  American  Progress).     New  York,  1876. 

Wright,  C.  D.,  History  of  Wages  and  Prices  in  Massachusetts,  175g-188S. 
Boston,  1885. 

IV.     AMERICAN  NEWSPAPER  MATERIAL 

New  England   States 

Boston   (Mass.),  Columbian  Centinel,  1808,  1809. 

Boston  (Mass.),  Gazette,  1807,  1808. 

Boston   (Mass.),  Independent  Chronicle,  1808,  1809. 

Boston    (Mass.),  Nevj   England  Palladium,   1807-1809. 

Boston  (Mass.),  The  Beperetory. 

Danbury  (Conn.),  New  England  Bepublican,  November  16,  1808. 

Danville  (Vt.),  North  Star,  1809. 

Hartford   (Conn.),  American  Mercury,  June  2,  1808. 

Hartford  (Conn.),  Connecticut  Cov.rant,  1808,  1809. 

Middletown  (Conn.),  Middlesex  Gazette. 

Newburyport  (Mass.),  The  Statesman,  1808,  1809. 

New  Haven  (Conn.),  Connecticut  Herald,  March  31,  1808, 

New  London    (Conn.),   Connecticut   Gazette,  June  1,   1808. 

Northampton  (Mass.),  Anti-Monarchist,  and  Bepublican  Watchman,  De- 
cember 21,  1808,  January  25,  1809. 

Northampton  (Mass.),  Hampshire  Gazette,  February  24,  July  20,  and 
August  31,  1808, 

Northampton   (Mass.),  Bepublican  Spy,  1808. 

Norwich   (Conn.),  The  Courier,  June  1,  1808. 

Worcester  (Mass.),  Massachusetts  Spy  or  Worcester  Gazette,  1807,  1809. 

Middle   States 

Albany  (N.  Y.),  The  Balance  and  New  YorTc  State  Journal,  1809. 

Baltimore   (Md.),  Evening  Post,  1808,  1809. 

Baltimore  (Md.),  Federal  Gazette  and  Baltimore  Daily  Advertiser,  1808. 

Baltimore  (Md.),  Federal  Bepublican  and  Commercial  Gazette,  July  20, 
1808  and  August  19,  1808. 

Catskill   (N.  Y.),  The  American  Eagle,  1809. 

Easton  (Md.),  Bepublican  Star  or  Eastern  Shore  General  Advertiser,  Feb- 
ruary 16,  1808. 

Frederick-Town  (Md),  Bepublican  Advocate,  June  2,  1808. 

New   York  Herald,   1808,    1809, 

Philadelphia  (Pa.),  Freeman's  Journal  and  Philadelphia  Mercantile  Ad- 
vertiser, 1808,  1809. 

Philadelphia  (Pa.),  Paulson's  American  Daily  Advertiser,  1808,  1809. 

Philadelphia  (Pa.),  Self's  Philadelphia  Gazette  and  Daily  Advertiser,  1808. 

Philadelphia  (Pa.),  United  States  Gazette,  1808. 

Washington   (D.  C),  National  Intelligencer,  1807-1809. 


236      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

Southern  States 
Milledgeville   (Ga.),  Milledgeville  Intelligencer,  November  22,  1808. 
New  Orleans   (La.),  Novve  Courrier  de  Louisiane,  April  29,  1808. 
New  Orleans   (La.),  L'Echo  Du  Commerce,  September  28,  1808, 
New  Orleans  (La.),  La  Lanterne  Magique,  November  20,  1808. 
New  Orleans  (La.),  El  Misisipi,  October  12,  1808. 
New  Orleans  (La.),  Moniteur  de  La  Louisiane,  May  7,  1808. 
New  Orleans  (La.),  The  Telegraphe  and  General  Advertiser,  May  7,  1808. 
Pendleton  (S.  C),  Miller's  Weekly  Messenger,  1807,  1808. 
Eichmond   (Va.),  The  Enquirer,  1808,  1809. 
Richmond   (Va.),  Virginia  Argus,  1808,  1809. 
Staunton   (Va.),  Staunton  Eagle,  May  27,  1808. 
Wilmington  (N.  C),  The  Wilmington  Gazette,  June  7,  1808. 

V.    COLLECTIONS  AND  MISCELLANEOUS  MATERIAL 

The  American  Eegister,  Vols.  Ill,  IV,  V,  Philadelphia,  1808  and  1809. 
American  State  Papers,  Class  III,  Finance,  Vol.  II,  Washington,  1832. 
American  State  Papers,  Class  I,  Foreign  Belations,  Vol.  Ill,  Washington, 

1832. 
American  State  Papers,  Class  X,  Miscellaneous,  Vol.  I,  Washington,  1834. 
American  State  Papers,  Class  IX,  Claims,  Washington,   1834. 
Ames,  H.  V.,  State  Documents  on  Federal  Belations:   the  States  and  the 

United  States.     Philadelphia,  1911. 
The  Annals  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  Vols.  17,  18,  and  19. 

Washington,  1852. 
Bogart,  E.  L.  and  Thompson,  C.  M.,  Readings  in  the  Economic  History  of 

the  United  States.    New  York,  1916. 
Boston,  A    Volume  of  Records  Relating  to   the  Early  History   of  Boston 

containing  Boston  Town  Records,  1796  to  1813.     Boston,  1905. 
Daniels,  G.  W.,  "American  Cotton  Trade  with  Liverpool  Under  the  Em- 
bargo and  Non-Intercourse  Acts,"  American  Historical  Review,  Vol.  21, 

New  York,  1916. 
Derby,  E.  H.,  "American  Navigation:  its  Checks,  its  Progress,  its  Dangers 

— the   Birth   of   the   Navy — the   Embargo,"   Atlantic   Monthly,   Vol.    7, 

Boston,  1861. 
Everett  E.,  "The  Embargo,"  North  American  Review,  Vol.  23,  Boston, 

1826. 
Francis,  C,  "Memoir  of  Hon.  John  Davis,"  Collections  of  the  MassacMi- 

setts  Historical  Society,  Vol.  X,  Series  III,  Boston,   1849. 
The   Gentleman's  Magazine:    and  Historical   Chronicle,  Vols.   78   and   79. 

London,  1808  and  1809. 
Howe,  John,  "Secret  Reports,"  edited  by  D.  W.  Parker  in  the  American 

Historical  Review,  Vol.  17,  New  York,  1911,  1912. 
Jefferson,  Thomas,  Correspondence  {Calendar  of  Virginia  State  Papers  and 

Other  Mss.,  edited  by  H.  W.   Flournoy,  Vol.  X).  Richmond,   1892. 
Johnston,  Alexander,  "The  Embargo"    (Lalor,  J.  J.,  Cyclopaedia  of  Po- 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809  237 

litical  Science,  Political  Economy,  and  of  the  Political  History  of  the 

United  States,  Vol.  III).     Chicago,  1883. 
Journal  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  Vol.  VI,  Washington,  1826. 
Lambert,  John.,  Travels  through  Canada  and  the  United  States  of  North 

America  in  the  Years  1806,  1807,  1808.  (2  vols.)  London,  1814. 
London    (Eng.)   Independent  Whig,  1809. 
London    (Eng.)   Morning  Herald,  1808. 
Madison,  James,  A  Letter  Addressed  to  the  Hon.  James  Madison,  Secretary 

of  State  of  the  United  States.     Printed  in  America,  1808. 
Melish,  John,  Travels  through  the  United  States  of  America  in  the  years 

1806  and  1807,  and  1809, 1810,  and  1811.  London,  1818. 
Murphey,   A.  D.,  Papers   of    (Publications  of  North   Carolina   Historical 

Commission,  Vol.  I).  Raleigh,  1914. 
Papers  of  the  Governors,  1785-1817    {The  Pennsylvania  Archives,  Fourth 

Series.    Edited  by  G.  E.  Reed  under  Direction  of  "W.  W.  Griest,  Secretary 

of  State).     Harrisburg,  1900. 
Pickering,  T.,  Considerations  on  the  Embargo  Laws.    Boston,  1808. 
Port  Folio,  Vol.  VI,  Philadelphia,  1808. 
Richardson,  J.  D.,  A  Compilation  of  Messages  and  Papers  of  the  Presidents. 

(10  vols.)   Washington,  1896. 
Savage,  C,  Letter  to  His  Father,  Samuel  Savage  (Massachusetts  Historical 

Society  Proceedings,  Vol.  49).  Boston,  1916. 
The  Scots  Magazine;  and  Edinburgh  Literary  Miscellany  Being  a  General 

Repository  of  Literature,  History,  and  Politics  for  1808,  Vols.  70  and  71. 

Edinburgh,  1808  and  1809. 
Sears,  L.  M.  "British  Industry  and  the  American  Embargo,"  Quarterly 

Journal  of  Economics,  November,  1919.    Cambridge,  Massachusetts. 
Sears,   L.   M.   "Philadelphia   and   the    Embargo    of    1808,"      Paper   read 

December  30,  1920  at  meeting  of  Historical  Association.     Copy  loaned 

through  the  courtesy  of  Mr.  Sears.    Printed  in  part  in  Quarterly  Journal 

of  Economics,  February,  1921.  Cambridge,  Massachusetts. 
United  States  Statutes  at  Large,  Vol.  II,  Boston,  1845. 
Wilson,  James  (?),  Some  Bemarls  and  Extracts,  In  Bcply  to  Mr.  Picker- 
ing's Letter,  on  the  subject  of  the  Embargo.    New  Haven,  1808. 


INDEX 


Adams,  Henry,  cited,  27,  28,  40,  41,  78, 
79,   «1,  200. 

Adams,  John  Quincy,  approaches  Jefiter- 
son,  Thomas,  on  threatened  civil  war, 
lb3;  defeated  for  Senate  in  1808,  131; 
favors  embargo,  40;  writes  Bacon, 
Ezekiel,  in  favor  of  substituting  some- 
thing else  for  embargo,  125;  writes 
Cook,  Orchard,  on  danger  of  Civil 
War,  149. 

Agriculture,  effect  of  embargo  on,  Amer- 
ican, discussed,  182-203;  effect  on 
various  sections  of  country,  197-203; 
payment  of  debts,  191-195;  price  of 
land  and  products,  182-191;  specula- 
tion, 195-196;  Canadian,  91;  English, 
75-77.  j&'ee  also  debates,  land,  and 
prices. 

Amendment,  limiting  power  to  levy  em- 
bargo  proposed,    147,    148. 

Amory,  T.  C,  cited,  72,  228,  229. 

Armstrong,  John,  minister  to  France,  ad- 
vises repeal  of  embargo,  67,  68;  sends 
news  of  Bayonne  decree,  36,  37. 

Authority,  state,  attacked  by  embargo, 
137,    138. 

Bacon,  Ezekiel,  declares  country  not  suf- 
fering as  much  as  stated  from  em- 
bargo, 62-64;  leads  in  party  revolt 
against  Jefferson,  164,  165;  quoted  on 
prices,  182;  receives  letter  from  Adams, 
J.  Q.,  on  inability  of  officers  to  en- 
force embargo,    125. 

Baltimore,  encourages  manufactures  by 
dinners,  176;  manufactures  of,  173, 
174;  prosperous  in  comparison  with 
some  other  cities,  224,  225;  supports 
embargo,   144. 

Bankruptcies,  American,  due  to  embargo, 
184,  191,  223-225;  Amory,  T.  C, 
quoted  on,  229;  Howe,  John,  quoted 
on,  224,  225;  Lambert,  John,  quoted 
on.  226.  „„„ 

Bayard,  J.  A.,  on  cost  of  embargo,  230; 
embargo  is  intended  to  coerce  Great 
Britain,  71;  laws  should  be  repealed 
when   people  do  not  like  them,   155. 

Bayonne  decree,   36,   37. 

Berlin   decree,    34,    35. 

Bibb,  W.  B.,  presents  resolutions  requir- 
ing members  of  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives to  appear  clothed  in  domestic 
manufactures,   167,   168. 

Boston,  opposition  to  embargo,  133-136, 
141-143;  sailors  demand  work,  95; 
ships  tied  up  in,  222,  223. 

Cabot,  George,  letters  to  Pickering,  Tim- 
othv,   221,   222. 

Campbell,  G.  W.,  fights  duel  with  Gar- 
denier,  Barent,  over  French  influence 
charges,  64 ;  opposes  repeal  of  embargo, 
159;  stays  away  when  vote  is  taken, 
160;  upholds  constitutionality  of  em- 
bargo,  66. 


Canada,  embargo  intended  to  stop  trade 
with,  49 ;  prosperity  of,  90-92,  205 ; 
trade  necessary  to  New  England,  113. 
/S'ee  also  commerce,  embargo  effects,  and 
smuggling. 

Canning,  George,  notes  on  English  com- 
mercial restrictions,  30-32;  sarcastic 
notes  to  Pinckney  on  embargo  evils,  68. 

Channing,  Edward,  cited,  80,  200,  201, 
220. 

Charleston,  poetical  attack  on  embargo, 
127;    sailors  riot  in,   98,   99. 

Chesapeake,  attacked  by  Leopard,  38. 

Civil  War,  danger  of  from  embargo  pres- 
sure,  163-165. 

Clopton,  John,  says  our  vessels  should 
not  go  to  sea  again  until  orders  and 
decrees  are  rescinded,  61. 

Cochrane,  Admiral  Alexander,  declares 
naval  blockade  of  French  Caribbean, 
33. 

Collectors,  influenced  by  public  opinion, 
116,  117,  125;  intimidated,  125;  re- 
moved for  failure  to  perform  duties, 
117;  resign,  116,  117. 

Commerce,  effect  of  embargo  on,  204- 
231;  effect  of  European  Wars  on,  9; 
extent  of,  10;  importance  of,  100;  be- 
fore embargo,  11-21;  Bremen,  18; 
China,  20,  21;  Denmark,  17;  France, 
14.  15 :  Great  Britain,  11,  12 ;  Ham- 
burg, 18;  Holland,  18,  19;  Italy,  19, 
20;  Madeira,  16;  Norway,  17;  Portu- 
gal, 16;  Russia,  16,  17;  Spain,  15, 
16;  Sweden,  17;  West  Indies,  British, 
12-14;  Danish,  17,  18;  Dutch,  19; 
French,  15;  Spanish,  16;  Swedish, 
17;  under  embargo,  204-231;  Bremen, 
207;  China,  208;  Denmark,  207; 
France,  205;  Great  Britain,  204,  205; 
Hamburg,  207;  Holland,  208;  Italy, 
208;  Norvvay,  207;  Portugal,  206; 
Portuguese  possessions,  206;  Russia, 
206;  Spain,  205;  Sweden,  206,  207; 
West  Indies,  British,  205;  Danish, 
207;  Dutch,  208;  French,  205; 
Spanish,  205,  206;  Swedish,  207; 
restrictions  on  commerce  by  France, 
33-37;  Bayonne  decree,  36,  37;  Ber- 
lin decree,  34,  35;  Milan  decree,  35, 
36;  results  of  restrictions,  37;  re- 
strictions on  commerce  by  Great 
Britain,  23-33;  April  8,  1806,  23; 
May  16.  1806.  24 :  January  7,  1807, 
24;  June  26,  1807,  25;  October  16, 
1807,  25;  November  11,  1807,  25-28- 
November  25,  1807,  28-30;  January 
8,  1808,  30,  31;  March  28,  1808,  31- 
April  14,  1808,  31,  32:  Mav  4.  1808, 
32;  June  23,  1808,  32,  33;  October 
14,  1808,  32,  33;  results  of  restric- 
tions, 37;  value  of  commerce,  204. 

Dearborn,  Henry,  receives  Jefferson's 
letter  on  necessity  of  embargo  repeal, 
164,     165;     sends    Jefferson's    circular 


238 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809 


239 


letter  on  law  enforcement  to  governor 
of  Virginia,   121,  122. 

Debates,  in  Congress  on  embargo,  60- 
67,  155-160.  ISee  also  references  under 
following  names :  Bacon,  Ezekiel ;  Bay- 
ard, J.  A.;  Bibb,  W.  B.;  CampbeU, 
G.  \V.;  Clopton,  John;  Eppes,  J.  W. ; 
Gardenier,  Barent;  Giles,  W.  B.;  Hill- 
house,  James ;  Johnson,  R.  M. ;  Liver- 
more,  Edward ;  Lloyd,  James ;  Macon, 
^Nathaniel ;  Masters,  Josiah,  Milnor, 
William;  Newton,  Thomas;  Nicholas, 
W.  C;  Quincy,  Josiah;  Randolph, 
John ;  Rhea,  John ;  Sloan,  James ; 
Southard,  Henry;  Tallmadge,  Benja- 
min ;  Troup,  George ;  and  Williams, 
D.  R. 

Debts,  difficulty  of  collecting  due  to  em- 
bargo,   191-195. 

Diplomacy,   embargo   in,    67-68. 

Duties,  demanded  by  England  for  right 
to  trade,   32,   33. 

Election,   presidential  of  1808,   131,   132. 

Embargo,  anniversary  of  observed,  136, 
137;  constitutionality  of  discussed,  by 
Campbell,  G.  W.,  66;  by  Davis,  John, 

123,  124;  by  Quincy,  Josiah,  65;  by 
Randolph,  John,  65;  by  Story,  Joseph, 

124,  125;  by  Williams,  D.  R.,  66; 
by  Trumbull,  Jonathan,  146,  147; 
effects  of,  on  agriculture,  American, 
182-203;  commerce,  204-231;  crime, 
101,  102;  emigration,  91;  fisheries,  60, 
101,  186;  foreign  nations,  49,  70-93; 
manufactures,  American,  166-181 ; 
politics,  130-132,  150;  the  poor,  97, 
98-  unemplovment,  98-100;  losses 
under,  230,  231;  object  of,  41,  42,  71, 
72,  226,  227;  provisions  of,  41,  45-59; 
opposition  to  and  support  of  discussed, 
94-165.  See  also  newspapers,  petitions, 
resolutions,  smuggling,   etc. 

Enforcement    act,    attacks    on,    137-139; 

provisions  of,   54-59. 
Enforcement  acts,  English  Parliamentary 

for  orders  in  council,  31,  32. 
Eppes,    J.    W.,    favors   Bibbs'    resolution, 

167:     speaks     on     insults    by     foreign 

nations,   157. 
Everett,     Edward,     cited,     228;     receives 

letter  from  Story.  Joseph.  164. 
Executions,    for    debt   interfered    with    by 

embargo.    105,    192-194.  . 

Exports,  domestic  by  states,  216  :  foreign 

by  states,  216-218;   value  of  by  states 

214,    215.      See    also    commerce    and 

tables. 

Factory  workers,  English,  injured  by 
embargo,   81. 

Florida,  effect  of  embargo  on,  49,  89. 

France,  commerce  with,  14.  15,  205 : 
effect  of  embargo  on,  70.  85;  insults 
by,  33-37.  See  also  commerce,  news- 
papers, smuggling,  etc. 

Gallatin,  Albert,  on  collectors  intimidated, 
125 ;  embargo  enforcement  recommend- 
ed, 53,  54;  embargo  partially  approved. 
39;  letters  received,  107,  119,  130: 
prices  admitted  low  for  agricultural 
products,  187,  188;  prosecutions  dif- 
ficult to  institute,  125;  report  on 
manufactures,  168,  169,  180,  181;  on 
specnlation,      196;      condemnation     of 


Sullivan,  James,  for  use  of  permits, 
109-111;  embargo  violations  cited,  119- 
122. 

Gardenier,  Barent,  charges  French  in- 
fluence in  passage  of  embargo,  64,  65 ; 
duel  with  Campbell,  over  French  in- 
fluence charge.  64 :  presents  petitions 
fcr   immediate  repeal  of  embargo.    105. 

Garland,  H.  A.,  cited,  190,  191,  229. 

Giles,  W.  B.,  a  committee  chairman,  125; 
exalts  beneficial  effect  of  embargo  on 
manufactures,  168;  writes  Jefferson, 
Thomas,  on  embargo  repeal,   163,   164. 

Great  Britain,  commerce  with,  11,  12, 
78,  204,  205;  effects  of  embargo  on, 
70-83 ;  imposes  restrictions  on  our 
trade,  23-33.  See  also  commerce  and 
prices. 

Hartford,  convention  at,  proposed,  149, 
150. 

Hillhouse,  James,  embargo  has  little  ef- 
fect on  warring  nations,  71 ;  smuggling 
is  common,  86;  sufferings  are  great, 
155. 

Howe,  John,  high  prices  in  West  Indies 
86;  politics  in  United  States,  130,  131 
150:  on  smuggling,  117-119;  on  suffer 
ing  in  United  States,  187,  224,  225 
United  States  not  a  manufacturing 
nation,    168. 

Imports,  value  of  1807,  21.  See  also 
commerce,    Nicholson    act.,    etc. 

Irwin,  Governor  Jared,  stimulus  to 
manufactures,   170,    171. 

Jefferson,  Thomas,  admits  federalization 
of  New  England  by  embargo,  132; 
admits  necessity  of  repealing  embargo, 
163-165;  admits  speculation,  196;  at- 
tacked as  under  French  influence,  43, 
44 ;  attacked  by  Bryant,  William  Cul- 
len,  127;  on  benefits  of  embargo,  170; 
on  diet  of  people,  160;  on  embarrass- 
ments from  embargo,  130;  fears  nec- 
essity of  giving  up  embargo  laws, 
120 ;  hostile  to  commerce,  45,  94, 
226;  letter  to  governors  on  embargo 
enforcement,  121 ;  losses  from  embargo, 
188,  189:  on  permits,  109-111;  peti- 
tions vex,  107;  power  to  suspend 
embargo,  50;  presents  for  from  Can- 
adian merchants.  90,  91 ;  profits  al- 
leged from  embargo,  188;  recommends 
embargo,  39;  sends  orders  of  Novem- 
ber 11  to  Congress,  47;  on  violations 
of  embargo,  119-121. 
of  New  England  by  embargo.  132  : 
Johnson.  R.  M..  embargo  injures  war- 
ring nations  and  their  possessions.  65. 
85.  86  ;  upholds  constitutionality  of  em- 
bargo. 66. 

King,   Rufus.   receives   letters  from   Gore. 

Christopher,      149;      from      Pickering. 
Timothy.    71.    72:    from   Trumbull,    John. 

76.  77;   from  Troup,  Robert,   191. 

Lambert,   John,   cited,   98,    99,    225-227. 

Land  and  products,  citations  on,  189- 
193:  Derbv,  E.  H.,  190;  Garland,  H. 
A..  190.  191:  Lloyd,  James,  189; 
Macon.  Nathaniel.  191  :  Melish,  John, 
190:  newspapers.  189:  Randolph, 
John,  189,  192,  193:  Troup.  Robert, 
191:  collections  stayed,  192-194;  con- 
centration  of   holdings,    189,    190;   dis- 


240      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 


count  for  cash,  191 ;  payment  for  ex- 
tended, 192;  taxed  by  embargo,  184, 
185;  values  affected  by  embargo,  189- 
194. 

Laws,  embargo,  provisions  of,  41,  45-59 ; 
December  22,  1807,  41;  January  8, 
1808,  45-47;  March  12,  1808,  48-50; 
April  12,  1808,  50;  April  25,  1808, 
50-53;  January  9,  1809,  54-58;  sum- 
mary of,  58,  59  ;  New  York  loan  law, 
194;  non-importation,  78;  stay,  192- 
194. 

Lincoln,  Levi,  attempts  to  enforce  em- 
bargo, 126,  145;  condemns  excitable 
town  meetings,  145;  receives  mail  from 
Jefferson,   Thomas,    110,    111,    196. 

Lincoln,  General  Benjamin,  hands  in 
resignation  as  collector  rather  than 
enforce  embargo  law,  117;  praised  for 
so  doing,   143. 

Livermore,  Edward  St.  Loe,  on  cost  of 
embargo,  230;  on  effect  on  fishermen, 
60,  61 ;  on  effect  on  West  Indies,  85 ; 
presents  petitions  for  repeal  of  em- 
bargo, 104 ;  votes  for  non-intercourse, 
163. 

Lloyd,  James,  on  evil  effects  of  embargo, 
189. 

Macon,  Nathaniel,  admits  bad  effects  of 
embargo  on  South,  156,  182;  con- 
fesses need  of  ready  money,  191; 
favors  continuance  of  embargo,  159, 
160;  opposes  Bibb's  resolution,  167; 
prefers  three  years  of  embargo  to  war, 
61. 

Madison,  James,  attacked  as  tool  of 
Napoleon,  44;  elected  president,  131; 
embargo  hurts  England,  72;  embargo 
precautionary  only,  45;  embargo  stimu- 
lated manufactures,  169;  lends  Jeffer- 
son, Thomas,  money,  188;  opposition 
to  embargo  noted,  150;  petitions  in- 
tended to  vex  Jefferson,  Thomas,  50, 
107;  receives  letters  from  Armstrong, 
John,  67,  68;  Pinckney,  William,  68; 
sends  report  on  losses  to  House  of 
Representatives,   37. 

Manufactures,  American,  affected  by  em- 
bargo, 166-181;  Baltimore,  Union 
Manufacturing  Company,  173,  174; 
Bibb,  W.  B.,  on,  166-168;  bounties  for 
importation  of  merinos,  175;  BoUes, 
A.  S.,  on,  179;  capital  diverted  from 
commerce  to,  179,  180;  Clark,  V.  S., 
on,  180;  dinners  to  encourage.  176; 
Eppes,  J.  W.,  on,  167:  establishments, 
a  few  closed,  175;  Gallatin,  Albert,  on 
168,  169.  179,  180;  Giles,  W.  B..  on 
168;  hats,  174;  hopes  of,  168;  Howe, 
John,  on,  168:  Irwin,  Jared,  on,  170, 
171;  Jarvis,  William,  imports  merinos, 
176;  Jefferson,  Thomas,  on,  170;  labor 
diverted  from  commerce  to  manufac- 
tures, 179,  180;  Lossing,  B.  J.,  on, 
179:  Macon,  Nathaniel,  on.  167; 
Madison,  James,  on,  169;  Masters, 
Josiah,  on,  168;  Melish,  John,  on,  171, 
172:  merinos  imnorted.  176:  mills. 
cotton  in  New  England,  174,  178, 
179:  woolen.  New  York,  178:  Ohio, 
resolution  of.  176:  Patton,  J.  H.,  on, 
179,  180;  Pennsylvania,  resolution  of. 
96,  97;  Philadelphia,  Manufacturing 
Society  of.  178;  Pittsburg,  manufac- 
tures of,  173 ;   potash,  manufacture  of. 


174;  premiums,  use  of,  176,  177 
Rei)ort,  House  on,  166;  Resolution 
House,  to  encom-age  wearing  of  home- 
spun, 166,  167;  Rhea,  John,  on,  167 
Richmond,  manufactures  of,  173  ;  Sears 
L.  M.,  on,  178;  ship  construction 
175;  Snyder,  Simon,  on,  170;  South 
Carolina,  "Homespun  Society"  of,  173 
Stone,  David,  on,  170  ;  thanks,  public, 
for  manufactures,  176;  Warden,  D 
B.,  on,  172,  173;  Washington  City 
Textile  company  of,  174;  Manufac 
tures,    English,    harmed,   81,    82. 

Masters,  Josiah,  United  States,  not  a 
manufacturing   nation,    168. 

Melish,  John,  cited,  169,  171,  172,  190, 
192. 

Merchants,  attitude  of  towards  embargo, 
American,  generally  opposed  to,  38, 
39,  98,  149,  221,  222;  British,  peti- 
tion for  repeal  of  cause  for,  81,  82  ; 
Canadian,  propose  presents  for  Jeffer- 
son, Thomas,   90,  91. 

Milnor,  William,  presents  petitions  for 
repeal  of  embargo,  105;  proposes 
March  4  as"  date  of  repeal,  156. 

Money,  carried  out  of  United  States  be- 
cause of  embargo,  91 ;  counterfeit  bank 
bills  brought  in,  102. 

Monroe,     James,     on     losses     caused     by 

British    and    French    restrictions,    37; 

receives     notes     from    Fox,     C.     J.,     on 

English   blockades,    23,   24;    withdraws 

from    election    of    1808,    131. 

Napoleon,  causes  loss  to  the  United 
States,  37;  controls  European  coast, 
18,  25;  defeated  at  Waterloo,  23;  in- 
fluences American  administrative  pol- 
icies, 98,  137,  138;  injures  England, 
79;  issues  Berlin  decree,  34;  Milan 
decree,  35,  36;  Bayonne  decree,  36, 
37. 

Newspapers  cited,  32,  33,  42-44,  74-77 
80,  82,  83,  94-100,  104,  108,  115, 
116,  127-130,  133,  135-139,  150-154, 
161,  162,  166,  171,  177-179,  183-190, 
193-195.    223,   224,    230. 

Newton,  Thomas,  brings  in  House  report 
against   modification    of   embargo,    166. 

New  York  City,  Federalist  young  men 
condemn  embargo,  97 ;  petitions  for 
repeal,  102,  103,  105,  140,  141;  ships 
tied  up  in  harbor,  222;  suffering  in, 
222,  225.  226;  support  voted  to  ad- 
ministration.   144. 

Nicholas,  W.  C,  resolution  for  repeal  of 
embargo,    156. 

Nicholson    non-importation    act,    78. 

Non -con sumption  agreement  suggested  by 
North,   98. 

Non-intercourse,  160,  161,  165.  See  also 
debates  and  newspapers. 

Opinion,  public.  See  debates,  newspapers, 
petitions,   resolutions,   summaries,   etc. 

Orders  in  council.  See  commerce,  re- 
strictions on. 

Otis.  H.  G.,  on  a  Hartford  convention, 
149. 

Permits  to  trade,   use  of.    107-111. 

Petitions,  American,  102-107,  184:  Eng- 
lish.   81,    82.      Spe   nlitn   resolutions. 

Philadelphia,  manufactures  prosppr  178; 
poor    suffer,    155;    sailors    in    difficulty. 


THE  AMERICAN  EMBARGO,  1807-1809 


241 


95,  96;  shipping  tied  up,  233;  sup- 
ports embargo,   144. 

Pickering,  Timothy,  declares  embargo 
levied  at  England,  71,  72;  receives 
letters   from   Cabot,    George,    221,    222. 

Pinckney,  C.  C,  candidate  for  presidency 
in    1808,    131. 

Pinckney,  William,  minister  to  Great 
Britain,  receives  letters  from  Canning, 
George,  30,  32 ;  from  Madison,  James, 
45 ;  recommends  continuance  of  em- 
bargo, 68,  76;  unavailingly  restates 
demands  of  United  States  to  English 
minister,    68,    69. 

Pinckney,  Charles,  governor  of  South 
Carolina,  Gallatin,  Albert,  on,  109; 
Jefferson,   Thomas,   on,    123. 

Pittsburg,  manufactures  of,  173 ;  sup- 
ports administration,    144. 

Plumer,   William,    cited,    163,    222. 

Poetry,  attacks  on  embargo,  95,  100, 
127-129,    184. 

Prevost,   George.      S<'e   Howe,   John. 

Prices,  embargo,  Canada,  92;  Florida, 
89;  France,  70;  Great  Britain,  72-78; 
United  States,  182-189;  West  Indies, 
84-89.  See  also  debates  and  news- 
papers. 

Quincy,   Edmund,   cited,    229,    230. 

Quincy.  Josiah,  conversation  with  Ran- 
dolph, John,  192,  193;  greatne.ss  of 
embargo,  61-63 ;  presents  petitions  for 
repeal  of  embargo,  103,  104;  on  prices, 
182;  receives  letter  from  Otis,  H.  G., 
on  a  Hartford  convention,  149;  thinks 
Jefferson,  Thomas,  wins  victory,  162, 
163 ;  on  unconstitutionality  of  embar- 
go,   65. 

Ramsay,  David,  cited,  187,  196,  197, 
202,    227. 

Randolph,  John,  advises  immediate  pas- 
sage of  embargo,  40 ;  calls  embargo  un- 
constitutional, 65;  declares  embargo 
enriches  knaves  at  expense  of  honest 
men,  65 ;  opposes  policy  of  vacillation, 
158,  159;  says  justice  is  not  always 
transacted,  192-194;  says  values  are 
depreciated,  189,  196;  on  smuggling, 
85;  on  speculation,  195;  urges  im- 
mediate  repeal   of   embargo,    156,    157, 

Resolutions,  favorable  to  embargo,  city, 
143,  144;  Baltimore,  144;  New  York, 
144;  Philadelphia,  144;  Pittsburg, 
144;  state,  148,  149;  Kentucky,  148. 
149;  New  Hampshire,  148;  North 
Carolina,  148;  Ohio,  176;  Virginia, 
149;  opposed  to  embargo,  citv,  132- 
135,  140,  144;  Boston,  133,  134; 
New  York.  97;  state,  144-147;  Con- 
necticut, 146,  147;  Delaware,  147; 
Massachusetts,  145,  146;  Rhode  Island. 
■147;  opposed  to  enforcement  act,  139- 
143:  Alfred,  140;  Bath,  139;  Boston, 
141-143;  Gloucester,  154;  New  York, 
140,  141;  Wells,  140;  proposed  in 
House  of  Representatives  to  encourage 
domestic  manufactures,   97,    167-169. 

Rhea,  .John,  favors  repeal  of  embargo, 
March  1,  157,  182.  183;  opposes 
Bibb's   resolution,    167. 

Sailors,  deprived  of  work,  95,  99,  100, 
101,  136,  137,  156.  See  alio  com- 
merce  and   suffering. 


Sears,  L.  M.,  cited,  79,  84,   178,  221. 

Ships,  construction  of,  175,  221 ;  de- 
tention of,  222,   223. 

Sloan,  James,  on  prices,  182;  on  specu- 
lation,   195. 

Smuggling,  discussed,  112-122;  attempts 
often  unsuccessful,  114;  causes  low 
prices  in  Canada,  92;  Dean,  execution 
of,  116;  force  used,  114-116;  Gallatin, 
Albert,  on,  119-122;  hardships  en- 
courage, 112;  Hillhouse,  James,  on, 
86;  Howe,  John,  on,  117-119;  Jeffer- 
son, Thomas,  on,  119-121;  Liberty,  re- 
captured by  "Indians,"  116;  Mary 
Jane  puts  to  sea  in  violation  of  law, 
116;  methods  used,  113,  114;  "Potash 
Rebellion,"  115;  Randolph,  John,  on, 
85;   a  traveller  on,   92. 

Snyder,  Simon,  elected  governor  of  Penn- 
sylvania,   131;    on    manufactures,    170. 

South,  proposes  taxation  of  northern  pro- 
ducts, 98;  suffering  of,  202,  213-215; 
supports  embargo,  60. 

Southard,  Henry,  paints  beneficial  effect 
of   embargo   on    manufactures,    158. 

Stone,  Governor  David,  on  gains  of 
manufactures,    170. 

Story,  Joseph,  on  constitutionality  of  em- 
bargo, 124,  125;  on  repeal  of  embar- 
go,   163,    164. 

Suffering,  under  embargo,  distribution 
of,  190.  101,  196-203,  213-230.  See 
also   debates,   petitions,   resolutions,   etc. 

Sullivan,  James,  quiets  sailors,  95;  use 
of   permits,    109,    110. 

Sullivan,    William,    cited,   41,    42. 

Summaries,  arguments  on  embargo,  66; 
commerce  prior  to  embargo,  21,  22; 
effect  of  embargo  on  agriculture,  202, 
203;  on  foreign  nations,  92,  93;  on 
industry,  230,  231;  on  manufactures, 
179-18i;  methods  used  to  develop 
opinion  against  embargo,  165;  for  em- 
bargo, 165;  provisions  of  embargo 
laws,    58,    59. 

Supplemental  embargoes,  first,  45-47; 
second,  47-50:  third,  50-53.  See  also 
Jefferson   and   non-intercourse  act. 


Tables,  statistical  with  comments  on,  14, 
21,  209-220;  exports,  animal,  211; 
cotton,  212;  of  domestic  origin,  213; 
fish,  209  :  forest,  210  ;  manufactures, 
212;  tobacco,  211;  vegetable  products, 
210;  exports,  destination  of,  21,  209; 
value  of,  by  states,  214,  215;  of  do- 
mestic by  states,  216;  of  foreign  by 
states,  216;  imports,  principal,  21; 
tonnage  employed  by  states,  coasting, 
220;   foreign,   219;    West   Indies,    14. 

Tallmadge,  Benjamin,  refers  to  specula- 
tion, 195,  196;  urges  speedy  repeal  of 
embargo,  158;  writes  McHenry,  James, 
on  town  meetings,   132,   133. 

Tonnage,  coasting  trade,  220,  221;  con- 
structed,  175,  221  :   foreign  trade,   219. 

Town  meetings,  resolutions  for  or  against 
embargo,  132-135.  See  also  petitions, 
newspajHTs,    towns,   etc. 

Troup,  George,  claims  South  suffers  as 
much  as  North  from  embargo,   182. 

Trumbull,  Governor  Jonathan,  opjioses 
embiirtro  enforcement  as  unconstitution- 
al,   146,    147. 

Trumbull,  John,  cited.  76,  77. 


242      IOWA  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

Violence,   due   to  embargo,    98-102;    114-  14,  205;  Danish,  17,  18,  207;   Dutch, 

116.     See  also  crime,  smuggling,  etc.  19,    208;    French,    15,    205;    Spanish, 

Votes,   embargo,    analyzed,    59,    60;    non-  16,    205,    206;    Swedish,    17,    207;    ef- 

interconrse,   155,   160,   161.  feet  of  embargo  on  discussed,  84-89. 

Williams,  D.  R.,  defends  constitutionality 
of    embargo,    66 ;    favors    retention    of 
Warden,  D.  B.,  cited,  172,  173.  embargo,    84,    85;    serves    notice    that 

West,   generally   supports   administratioB,  he  is  for  war  if  embargo  is  removed, 

60,  148,  149.  157-159;  stays  away  when  vote  on  re- 

West  Indies,  commerce  with,  British,  12-  peal  is  taken,  160. 


Obtainable  from  the  University 
Librarian:  Price  $1.50 


■■■■I 


4i 


an 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


fe:JJlJ.J^^RtfO  MAR0'41997''-T 


Series  9482 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

pilll  I  IP  III  II  Ml  III  |l|l|l|llll 


AA    000  499  398    6 


I 


